I suspect that given the group's proclivity to talk endlessly on almost any
topic that the real reason that you got no response was that no one understood
your question sufficiently to answer it.  You obviously have an alarm system.
You have some other EN standard which is in conflict with the alarm EMC
standard.  You have some authorizing bodies which don't accept your data.  You
are unhappy about the situation.

What standard is in conflict with the alarm standard?
Why is it being applied to your product?
Does your product fall into multiple product families?
What approvals are you approaching a certifier for?
Who is the certifier?

BTW: attempting to change the way CENELEC does business is futile.  You will be
attempting a remedy on government time frames for a problem with commercial time
frames.  You are advocating from a small constituency (alarm systems) against
what is likely a larger constituency.  Your best bet is to figure out what they
want, the easiest way to do it, and give it to them.

Kevin Harris wrote:

> Hello Again Group,
>
> Well the group's total silence on this point is indeed interesting. Does
> nobody know how to proceed or is everyone just keeping their corporate heads
> down :))))
> Please reply offline if you feel uneasy answering this question in a public
> forum.
>
> Regards
>
> Kevin Harris
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Harris [mailto:harr...@dscltd.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 08, 1999 10:38 AM
> To: EMC-PSTC (E-mail)
> Subject: European Standards in conflict with the EMC directive
>
> Greetings,
>
> Is there an established procedure for demanding the withdrawal of EMC
> clauses within standards who's primary purpose is industry regulation, not
> EMC. In my company's industry there is an established product family
> standard for EMC (EN50130-4) but the good people at CENELEC seem to be
> ignoring the EMC directive, and have published within the last year or two,
> EN standards which include EMC testing clauses, with methods that are at
> odds with the EMC document EN50130-4 published in the OJ. Especially
> troubling to me is the fact that all of the test organisations that test for
> the industry regulation specification do not accept either third party or
> self declarations that the product is EMC compliant. I do not wish to test
> the same product more than once for a single market. What path do you
> recommend I follow to demand the repeal of these clauses.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Kevin Harris
> Manager, Approval Services
> Digital Security Controls
> 3301 Langstaff Road
> Concord, Ontario
> CANADA
> L4K 4L2
>
> Tel   +1 905 760 3000 Ext. 2378
> Fax +1 905 760 3020
>
> -
>
> ---------
> This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
> To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
> with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
> quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
> jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
> roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

--
Jon D. Curtis, PE

Curtis-Straus LLC             j...@curtis-straus.com
Laboratory for EMC, Safety, NEBS, SEMI-S2 and Telecom
527 Great Road                voice (978) 486-8880
Littleton, MA 01460           fax   (978) 486-8828
http://www.curtis-straus.com



---------
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to majord...@ieee.org
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes).  For help, send mail to ed.pr...@cubic.com,
jim_bac...@monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or
roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).

Reply via email to