NMÉ, ETA and CE — when they are required and when they are not
First, the terminology
Section titled “First, the terminology”An organisation, not a document. ÉMI Nonprofit Kft. is a designated Technical Assessment Body (TAB) authorised by the Hungarian licensing authority and approved by the European Commission to issue technical assessments. When somebody says “we have ÉMI”, they generally mean that they hold an NMÉ.
The Hungarian National Technical Assessment. It applies to a specific construction product and is valid only in Hungary, providing the basis for a declaration of performance. It is used when no applicable harmonised European standard exists or the product differs significantly from that standard. Lightweight wall and floor systems typically fall into this category.
The European Technical Assessment. It follows the same logic but is valid throughout the European Union. It can be requested voluntarily and is governed by Regulation (EU) No 305/2011. ETAs may be issued by EOTA member bodies.
A different category. CE marking applies to the product, not the complete system. For a section, it demonstrates that the profile was manufactured correctly from the coil — without edge cracking, for example — so the structural calculation can rely on the stated cross-section. In practice, this is at least as important as the system documentation.
ÉMI is not the only body
Section titled “ÉMI is not the only body”Several designated technical assessment bodies operate in Hungary. Depending on the product group, organisations such as CEMKUT Kft. and TÜV Rheinland InterCert Kft. may also issue an NMÉ under government designation. This matters because assessment bodies can differ in which verification methods they accept.
An existing NMÉ can also be submitted for conversion into an ETA if the manufacturer intends to distribute the product across Europe. The process is longer, but it does not have to begin from zero.
What does a technical assessment examine?
Section titled “What does a technical assessment examine?”Three things: the build-up, structural performance and fire protection. In our experience, only the last has substantial additional practical value.
Build-up
Section titled “Build-up”The assessment examines whether the assembly is technically appropriate. Someone is already responsible for that build-up, however: the architect on smaller projects or a building-envelope specialist on larger ones. They have the qualifications and design rules required. It is not obvious why a separate system assessment is needed here when masonry buildings do not require one.
Structural performance
Section titled “Structural performance”The procedure requests and reviews a previous design. If a different designer later develops a different solution, nobody checks that through the original assessment. The conclusion is the same as for every structure: a competent designer must produce and sign a sound design. Thin-walled steel must be designed to the Eurocodes like any other load-bearing structure.
Fire protection
Section titled “Fire protection”This is the part with distinct technical substance. Fire resistance applies to the complete assembly, not to an individual board, so it must be verified as a system. A load-bearing wall does not automatically have a standalone system certificate. Compliance therefore requires either an NMÉ or a signed, project-specific fire simulation. This is the technology’s most sensitive point: Fire protection for thin-walled steel.
The kit-of-parts problem
Section titled “The kit-of-parts problem”The assessment framework was originally developed for construction kits. In a kit, an element can be installed without a separate structural calculation because the manufacturer’s engineers have already established the parameters and the catalogue defines the permitted use. A prefabricated beam-and-block floor is an example: unit width, beam spacing and maximum topping depth are specified.
A thin-walled steel frame designed and built on site for unique geometry is different. Every project receives its own structural design. Applying kit logic to it is like demanding a sewing-pattern catalogue for a made-to-measure garment.
When is it mandatory, and when is it not?
Section titled “When is it mandatory, and when is it not?”This is where most misunderstandings arise. Section 13(5) of Hungary’s National Fire Protection Code, Decree 54/2014 of the Ministry of the Interior, states that buildings made with lightweight construction technology may only use technology, structural elements, build-ups and configurations tested by an accredited institution.
The question is what qualifies as “lightweight construction technology”. Based on the position of the Hungarian Ministry of the Interior’s disaster-management authority, three cases can be distinguished.
1. Construction kit
Section titled “1. Construction kit”The building is supplied as a manufacturer’s or system owner’s product and assembled from prefabricated wall and floor panels. The manufacturer holds system documentation and must not deviate from it by omitting or replacing components. A declaration of performance is issued for the kit.
2. Prefabricated, but not supplied by one manufacturer
Section titled “2. Prefabricated, but not supplied by one manufacturer”The building is assembled from assessed construction elements sourced from multiple suppliers. It is still prefabricated, and compliance must be demonstrated by an accredited laboratory test report, declaration or Fire Protection Conformity Certificate.
3. Frame built on site
Section titled “3. Frame built on site”If the structure is not prefabricated but a frame erected and clad on site, the official interpretation does not treat it as lightweight construction technology in this specific regulatory sense. The contractor uses construction products whose own declarations of performance demonstrate conformity, and an NMÉ or ETA cannot be required. Fire compliance must be demonstrated through Eurocode fire-resistance design and a site-log declaration by the responsible technical manager confirming construction in accordance with that design.
The point to remember
Section titled “The point to remember”The relevant question is not whether “the company has an NMÉ”. It is whether the house is assembled from prefabricated panels or from a frame built on site. These are different legal categories and require different evidence.
What should you check if there is no NMÉ?
Section titled “What should you check if there is no NMÉ?”The profile’s CE documentation
Section titled “The profile’s CE documentation”This demonstrates that the section was formed correctly from the coil and that the structural calculation can rely on its stated cross-section. Without it, the calculation lacks a dependable basis.
Fire-performance evidence
Section titled “Fire-performance evidence”This may be a project-specific fire-resistance calculation or simulation, or an ETA or NMÉ where one exists. Simulation can be commissioned separately. Its cost does not always make sense for a family home, but it can be justified for a larger building.
The designer’s signature
Section titled “The designer’s signature”Ultimately, everything depends on this. A system document does not replace project-specific design; it only confirms that a previous solution was reviewed once for somebody else.
What the profession still debates
Section titled “What the profession still debates”We do not claim this issue is conclusively settled. A stricter interpretation can also be derived from the wording of the regulation, and you may encounter it in practice. Two inconsistencies remain.
First, a building with a hollow-section frame and sandwich panels is also lightweight, yet system documentation is rarely requested, while it commonly is for thin-walled steel. Second, some banks require an NMÉ for steel-framed houses during mortgage assessment. This is an internal banking rule rather than a statutory requirement and should be clarified before applying for finance because it is difficult to resolve afterwards.
This is not legal advice
Section titled “This is not legal advice”This summary reflects our own design practice and our interpretation of the cited regulations in summer 2026. Regulations change, and for a specific project the position of the relevant authority and fire-protection designer always takes precedence. Referenced legislation: Hungarian Decree 54/2014 (XII. 5.) of the Ministry of the Interior, Section 13; Government Decree 275/2013 (VII. 16.); Regulation (EU) No 305/2011; and Hungarian Act XXXI of 1996, Section 13.