Electrostatic Risks And Chemical Protective Clothing In Atex / Ex-zones

Managing Ignition Hazards Through PPE Regulation, EN 1149 and Proper Earthing

Executive Summary

Protective clothing worn in potentially explosive atmospheres does not require, and cannot obtain, certification under the ATEX Directive 2014/34/EU because personal protective equipment is explicitly excluded from the scope of that Directive. The correct and sufficient regulatory route is compliance with the PPE Regulation (EU) 2016/425, supported by the EN 1149 series, and the use of the garment as part of a properly earthed system.

In practical terms, the compliant answer is: PPE Regulation 2016/425 + EN 1149 + proper earthing = appropriate electrostatic risk control for protective clothing in EX-zones. Requests for “ATEX-certified clothing” reflect a genuine safety concern, but they are not legally meaningful under EU law because ATEX applies to equipment and protective systems, while clothing remains PPE

I. Electrostatic discharge: a frequently underestimated ignition hazard

In potentially explosive atmospheres, ignition hazards are often associated with open flames, hot surfaces, or mechanical sparks. However, electrostatic discharge (ESD) remains one of the most frequently underestimated ignition sources, despite being involved in numerous industrial accidents. ^[1]

A well-known example is the 2007 Barton Solvents explosion in the United States, which occurred during the filling of a storage tank with a low-conductivity flammable solvent. The U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board identified a static spark as the most likely ignition source, associated with conditions inside the tank during filling. ^[2]

Incidents such as this illustrate a critical reality of ATEX environments: electrostatic discharge can occur during normal operations and can release sufficient energy to ignite flammable gases, vapours, mists, or combustible dusts. Equally important is the recognition that electrostatic hazards are not limited to equipment alone. People working in EX zones—and the protective clothing they wear—are integral parts of the electrostatic system. If not properly managed, clothing can accumulate charge and become an unintended ignition source

II. Regulatory framework: ATEX and PPE are separate but complementary

European legislation addresses explosion protection and personal protection through separate but complementary legal routes. ATEX Directive 2014/34/EU governs equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres, while ATEX Directive 1999/92/EC defines employer duties for protecting workers in EX-zones. ^[3][4]

Protective clothing is regulated as personal protective equipment under Regulation (EU) 2016/425. In parallel, Directive 89/656/EEC defines employer obligations for the selection, provision, maintenance and use of PPE at work. This distinction determines the correct certification route, the standards to reference, and the appropriate answer to customer or procurement questions. ^[5]

Because ATEX Directive 2014/34/EU explicitly excludes personal protective equipment, chemical protective clothing is not an ATEX product and must not bear ATEX marking or claim ATEX certification. If a customer asks for “ATEX-certified clothing,” the accurate response is that the garment should be certified as PPE and demonstrate electrostatic safety through applicable PPE standards, primarily EN 1149.

III. Regulatory framework: ATEX and PPE are separate but complementary

Chemical protective clothing is commonly manufactured from synthetic polymer materials such as polypropylene, polyester, or polyethylene. These materials are selected for their chemical resistance and durability, but they are also non-conducting or poorly conducting by nature, which makes them prone to electrostatic charge generation. ^[6]

Electrostatic charging occurs whenever materials are involved in friction, contact, or separation processes. In industrial environments, this includes everyday activities such as:

For protective clothing, the mechanisms are straightforward and unavoidable. Charge is generated through repeated movement of the wearer, friction between garment layers and undergarments, and contact with surrounding materials. In many cases, environmental conditions further influence this behavior, particularly when antistatic performance relies on moisture in the air.

If electrostatic charge is allowed to accumulate, it may be released suddenly when the wearer approaches a conductive object such as a tank, drum, or section of pipework. In a potentially explosive atmosphere, such a discharge may act as an ignition source.

IV. Controlling electrostatic risk: the role of EN 1149 

In ATEX environments, the objective is not to eliminate static electricity entirely—which is neither practical nor realistic—but to prevent hazardous electrostatic discharge. The critical question is whether charge can be released in an uncontrolled way and become an ignition source.

Within the European PPE and workplace framework for work in explosive atmospheres, protective clothing is expected to be selected and used so that it does not contribute to ignition risk during normal operation. In this context, the EN 1149 series provides the technical basis for assessing how clothing materials and garments behave electrostatically when worn.

Under PPE Regulation (EU) 2016/425, Annex II, Essential Health and Safety Requirement 2.6 requires PPE intended for potentially explosive atmospheres to be designed and manufactured so that it cannot become the source of an electric, electrostatic or impact-induced arc or spark likely to ignite an explosive mixture. This is a performance-based PPE requirement, not an ATEX product-certification requirement.

Rather than implying that a garment can make a workplace “explosion-safe,” EN 1149 focuses on a more specific and practical issue: does the clothing help limit, control, or reduce electrostatic discharge risk under defined conditions of use?

The EN 1149 series provides the harmonised technical route for demonstrating this electrostatic performance. EN 1149-1 measures surface resistivity, EN 1149-2 measures vertical resistance through the material, EN 1149-3 measures charge decay, and EN 1149-5 defines the material performance and garment design requirements for electrostatic dissipative protective clothing.

EN 1149 standards are PPE standards, not ATEX standards. Their role is to control the same ignition hazard—static electricity—through the PPE regulatory route. This distinction helps avoid the misleading impression that a garment can be “ATEX-certified,” while still giving a clear and audit-ready explanation of how electrostatic ignition risk is addressed.

V. What EN 1149-5 requires in practice 

Within the EN 1149 series, EN 1149-5 is particularly relevant to chemical protective clothing. It defines both material performance requirements and basic garment design principles aimed at reducing the likelihood of ignition relevant electrostatic discharge originating from clothing. ^[7]

For material performance, EN 1149-5 allows compliance via established material-performance routes, commonly including charge decay or surface electrical resistance testing

In practice, EN 1149-5 requirements may be met through either EN 1149-1 testing based on surface resistance, or EN 1149-3 testing based on charge decay performance, depending on the material characteristics and garment design.

However, EN 1149-5 does not treat electrostatic performance as a material property alone. It also includes garment level design considerations intended to prevent localized charge accumulation and uncontrolled discharge during normal movement. These include, for example:

In this sense, EN 1149-5 recognizes that electrostatic risk is governed by the interaction between material properties and garment design, not by fabric performance in isolation.

VI. Antistatic protection is a system, not a garment feature

One of the most common misconceptions is the belief that antistatic clothing works on its own.

Antistatic or dissipative treatment means that the clothing material is capable of dissipating electrostatic charge, but controlled discharge requires an effective path to earth. In real working environments, electrostatic protection is therefore a system-level arrangement involving the garment, compatible gloves and footwear, conductive or dissipative flooring, and proper grounding of the wearer. ^[10]

If this discharge path is incomplete, electrostatic charge may still be released abruptly, for example, by jumping to a nearby conductive object—creating a spark. For this reason, EN 1149 compliant clothing should always be regarded as one element of a broader electrostatic control system, rather than a standalone protective measure.

The total earthed system can be understood as: person → garment/PPE ensemble → footwear → floor → earth. CEN/TR 16832 emphasizes that the primary defence against hazardous electrostatic discharges from personnel is proper earthing; a commonly cited requirement is that the resistance between the person and earth should be less than 10⁸ Ω. Without this complete path to earth, dissipative clothing alone cannot reliably prevent hazardous electrostatic discharge.

VII. Humidity dependence and real world limitations

Many garments described as “antistatic” or “discharging” rely on surface treatments or additives that attract moisture from the surrounding air. This moisture forms a thin conductive layer on the fabric surface, allowing charge to spread and dissipate.

In low-humidity environments, antistatic performance may be reduced, particularly where performance depends on surface moisture. Therefore, test conditions and actual operating humidity should be reviewed together. For disposable chemical protective clothing, antistatic performance is also not permanent. Storage conditions, handling, contamination, and repeated use can all reduce effectiveness over time. These realities reinforce why electrostatic performance should be assessed against a recognized standard and evaluated together with actual operating conditions.

Electrical continuity is another practical limitation. Underclothing, gloves, boots, accessories or other PPE items should not interrupt the conductive or dissipative path between the body, garment and earth. CEN/TR 16832 also emphasizes that personnel should not wear clothing or items that jeopardise electrical continuity between the body and conductive or electrostatic dissipative elements.

VIII. EN 1149 versus “anti-static”: understanding the difference

The term “anti-static” is often used loosely to describe general charge reduction effects. EN 1149-5, however, addresses whether protective clothing can control ignition relevant electrostatic discharge under defined conditions of use.

Confusing the two may result in inadequate risk control in EX environments.

IX. Critical exception: protective clothing with electrical or electronic components

If protective clothing incorporates electrical or electronic components, such as sensors, powered devices or monitoring systems, those components may fall under ATEX Directive 2014/34/EU and must be suitable for the relevant zone and gas group. This does not change the regulatory status of the garment itself: the clothing remains PPE under Regulation (EU) 2016/425, while the integrated electrical or electronic component must meet the applicable ATEX requirements.

X. Employer responsibilities in EX-zoness

Employers remain responsible for the workplace risk assessment. Under ATEX workplace requirements, they must assess explosion risks, eliminate ignition sources where possible, classify hazardous areas and provide work clothing that does not generate hazardous electrostatic discharges. Under the PPE use directive, they must provide suitable PPE free of charge, maintain it in good condition, train workers and ensure that the selected PPE is used correctly in line with the site risk assessment.

Key takeaways

• Protective clothing is not an ATEX product and should not be described as ATEX-certified. The correct regulatory route is PPE Regulation (EU) 2016/425, supported by EN 1149 and proper earthing.
• EN 1149-5 should not be interpreted as making a garment or workplace “explosion-safe.” It provides material performance and garment design requirements intended to reduce ignition-relevant electrostatic discharge when the clothing is used as part of a properly earthed system. 
• Compliance should be supported by material test results according to EN 1149-1, EN 1149-2 or EN 1149-3 as applicable, together with confirmation that the finished garment design meets the relevant EN 1149-5 requirements.
• Antistatic performance is a system-level control. It depends on the interaction between garment, gloves, footwear, flooring, grounding path, environmental conditions, underclothing and correct use in the field.
• If protective clothing contains electrical or electronic components, those components may need ATEX approval, while the garment itself remains PPE and should still be evaluated through the PPE and EN 1149 route.

References

[1] UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE), ATEX and explosive atmospheres, guidance page describing explosive atmospheres, ignition sources, and the two ATEX Directives.

[2] U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB), Barton Solvents Static Spark Ignites Explosion Inside Flammable Liquid Storage Tank, Case Study No. 2007-06-I-KS, final report released June 26, 2008.

[3] Directive 2014/34/EU on equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres; Article 1(2)(d) excludes personal protective equipment.

[4] Directive 1999/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Minimum requirements for improving the safety and health protection of workers potentially at risk from explosive atmospheres.

[5] Regulation (EU) 2016/425 of the European Parliament and of the Council on personal protective equipment, Annex II, Essential Health and Safety Requirement 2.6.

[6] IEC/TS 60079-32-1 / CLC/TR 60079-32-1, Explosive atmospheres — Part 32-1: Electrostatic hazards — Guidance, guidance on electrostatic ignition hazards, earthing/bonding, charge generation, and operating conditions.

[7] BS EN 1149-5:2018 / EN 1149-5:2018, Protective clothing — Electrostatic properties — Part 5: Material performance and design requirements.

[8] BS EN 1149-3:2004 / EN 1149-3:2004, Protective clothing — Electrostatic properties — Part 3: Test methods for measurement of charge decay.

[9] BS EN 1149-1:2006 / EN 1149-1:2006, Protective clothing — Electrostatic properties — Part 1: Test method for measurement of surface resistivity.

[10] CEN/TR 16832, Selection, use, care and maintenance of personal protective equipment for preventing electrostatic risks in hazardous areas.

About DuPont Personal Protection

DuPont is committed to developing innovative solutions with purpose, foresight, and collaboration at the core. Guided by our fundamental values—Safety and health, Respect for people, Highest ethical behavior, Protecting the planet—we believe safety is not just a priority, but a strategic business value. It stands as one of the four pillars of our operations and management philosophy.

DuPont Personal Protection is recognized as one of the most trusted brands in the personal protective equipment (PPE) industry. We understand that those who work with or around hazardous substances every day need absolute confidence in their protective apparel. That’s why DuPont™ Tyvek®, Tychem®, and ProShield® garments are engineered to deliver superior protection for frontline workers, combining long-lasting barrier performance with exceptional comfort through advanced fabric technology and seam design.

Every hero deserves protection. DuPont Personal Protection is dedicated to safeguarding every step of your journey