I have been following this thread with interest and would like to ask Ing. Gert Gremmen a pointed question.
Gert, In your email you stated: "For the moment all i want to say is that the GOAL of all so-called new-approach directives is and was to stop all barriers that existed for importing and exporting any goods. The GOAL of the ce-mark was to introduce a common symbol to show that the product marked had free access to the full EU." Q. Does Germany, or any other EU country, impose a fine on ITE products that comply with the Class A EMI limits intended for commercial applications? Thank you Charles Grasso EMC Engineer StorageTek 2270 Sth 88th Street Louisville CO 80027 MS 4262 gra...@louisville.stortek.com Tel:(303)673-2908 Fax(303)661-7115 Symposium Website URL: http://www.ball.com/aerospace/ieee_emc.html >---------- >From: Ing. Gert Gremmen[SMTP:cet...@cetest.nl] >Reply To: Ing. Gert Gremmen >Sent: Monday, April 27, 1998 2:09 PM >To: WOODS, RICHARD; 'emc-pstc' >Subject: RE: GS Requirements > >Hello Richard, Group, > >I will come back to the legal aspects of this. > >For the moment all i want to say is that the GOAL of all so-called >new-approach directives is and was to stop all barriers that existed for >importing and exporting >any goods. The GOAL of the ce-mark was to introduce a common symbol to show >that the product marked had free access to the full EU. > >It applies to toys, elevators, sterile injection needles as well as >electronic typewriters. >It applies to machines, simple pressure vessels and sailing boats. >It will apply to many more goods in the near future. > >If for any reason and for any beliefs any local national law could resist >this European regime of ce-marking, the whole foundation under ce-marking >would fall down. > >I am not a lawyer in European affairs, but i understand well how the ce-mark >stuff has been implemented and how it is meant to be. > >Therefore, if any legal hole exists, it will be filled up, unless the EC is >really less powerful as f.a. Germany. > >I suggest that one of you, not being a test-house or consultant, innocently >directs this question to Mr. Bangemann of the European Commission. > >Let's hear what he has to say. > >To be read: The New Approach (legislation and standards on the free >movement of goods in Europe) by CENELEC > > >Other considerations (from seminar papers) > >Basic conditons for the free Eur. market: > >Free traffic of persons / goods/ services/ money > >1/ Stop taxes on importing >2/ stop limitiations in quantity >3/ Stop all measures of equal effect including technical limitations > >Technical limitations are : > >National technical regulations >National standards >National test- and certification procedures > >1. Stopping limitations by: > >Mutual recognition > >exceptions : >- public order >- public health, lives of persons and plants or animals in danger >- national properties artistic or historic >- industrial and commercial properties > >Exceptions should be no hidden limitations. > >2. harmonisation of technical regulations > >1983 information phase >1985 new approach directives >1989 global approach for conformity assessment > >Directive 83/189/EEC: >Goal: >- stop implementations of new national regulations >- halt progress on national initiatives > >Contents: > >- notifying necessary for new national regulations (to EC) >- hold off period for national regulations > > > >So far: > >Gert Gremmen > > > >== Ce-test, Qualified testing == >Consultants in EMC, Electrical safety and Telecommunication >Compliance tests for European standards and ce-marking >Member of NEC/IEC voting committee for EMC. >Our Web presence: http://www.cetest.nl >List of current harmonized standards http://www.cetest.nl/emc-harm.htm >15 great tips for the EMC-designer http://www.cetest.nl/features01.htm > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org >[mailto:owner-emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org] On Behalf Of WOODS, RICHARD >Sent: maandag 27 april 1998 14:07 >To: 'emc-pstc' >Subject: RE: GS Requirements > >This has been a very interesting thread. There appears to be two distinct >groups of thought. One group believes that an EU state can enforce a state >law affecting trade as long as it is not in violation of a Directive. >Another group seems to believe that no EU state may enforce a law the tends >to impede trade. To this latter group I ask the question, what is the legal >basis for this claim? > >Richard Woods >Sensormatic Electronics >wo...@sensormatic.com >Views expressed by the author do not necessarily represent those of >Sensormatic. > >
