Skip to content
PSPP Co., Ltd.
Completed
PSPP-PED-CATIV-MODG

PED Category IV Pressure Vessel — Incoming QC & Notified-Body Challenge

Incoming quality control that caught serious weld root-pass defects on a PED Category IV pressure vessel already CE-marked and stamped by a Notified Body — and formally challenged the conformity assessment.

Feb 2025 — May 2025Federal Republic of GermanyEU pressure-equipment fabricator — PED 2014/68/EU, Module G
Welder bonding metal in an industrial workshop
Category IV
PED risk class
Module G
Unit verification
Post-CE
Defects caught after stamping
Formal
NoBo conformity challenge

The Challenge

A Category IV pressure vessel under Directive 2014/68/EU had already been pressure-tested, CE-marked and stamped by the Notified Body — yet incoming QC at site revealed unacceptable root passes and multiple internal and external defects. Under Module G, unit verification (design review, surveillance, final examination) is a legal declaration of conformity, not a decorative stamp.

Scope & Approach

Incoming inspection of a certified vessel

During incoming / receiving inspection at site, our team performed visual and dimensional verification of welds against EN 13445 and PED Category IV requirements on a vessel that had already been certified, pressure-tested and stamped by the Notified Body under Module G.

Non-conformity & Module G scrutiny

Unacceptable root passes and further internal and external defects were identified and documented. We evaluated the scope of the Module G final examination — where, for Category IV equipment, a proper final examination normally involves internal inspection unless it is technically not feasible — and analysed how weak verification transfers risk to the manufacturer, operator and ultimately the public.

Formal challenge, not a quiet repair

Rather than repair and move on, the findings were escalated and the Notified Body’s conformity assessment was formally challenged — preserving the integrity of the CE-marking system and the operator’s protection.

The Outcome

The defects were formally documented and the conformity assessment challenged — rather than quietly repaired and passed over. This protected the operator from latent risk and reinforced that a CE mark under PED is a legal declaration of conformity, and that for Category IV equipment a proper final examination normally involves internal inspection unless technically not feasible.

Codes & Standards

PED 2014/68/EUEN 13445Module GCE Marking

Related work

More case studies

All projects