Hi Richard,

I think it all becomes a moot point on Feb 7. I was looking at the ETSI site
yesterday and they indicate there that EN 300-220-3 will be published in the
OJ  for the R&TTE directive on that date. EN 300-220-3 is the harmonised EN
covering the essential requirements under Article 3.2 of the directive

 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

Email: harr...@dscltd.com <mailto:harr...@dscltd.com> 

                -----Original Message-----
                From:   wo...@sensormatic.com [mailto:wo...@sensormatic.com]
                Sent:   Wednesday, January 31, 2001 12:43 PM
                To:     emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
                Subject:        RTTE & Placing in Service


                Consider a low power radio transmitter subject to EN 300 220
that is to be
                used only by the manufacturer's service organization and
will not be placed
                on the market for sale. EN 300 220 is a harmonized standard,
but the
                operating frequency is not harmonized.

                It appears that the provisions in Article 6 do not apply
since the product
                will not be placed on the market. Article 7 contains the
provisions for
                putting into service. Notification to the spectrum
authorities (from Article
                6) does not appear to be a requirement even though the
frequency is not
                harmonized. It appears that it is sufficient to comply with
the essential
                requirements and apply the CE marking which must include the
alert symbol
                per Annex VII since the frequency is not harmonized. 

                A member state may restrict the placing in service, but only
for the three
                reasons specified in Article 7.2: efficient use of the
spectrum,
                interference and public health.  It appears there is no
legal requirement to
                notify the state prior to placing in service. Thus, any
restriction would
                occur due to the state determining that one of the three
reasons apply to
                one or more devices after it being placed in service. While
it may be argued
                that it is a good idea to notify the states anyway, it does
not appear to be
                a legal requirement.

                Comments?

                Richard Woods

                -------------------------------------------
                This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
                Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

                To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
                     majord...@ieee.org
                with the single line:
                     unsubscribe emc-pstc

                For help, send mail to the list administrators:
                     Jim Bacher:              jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
                     Michael Garretson:        pstc_ad...@garretson.org

                For policy questions, send mail to:
                     Richard Nute:           ri...@ieee.org
                

-------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.

To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
     majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
     unsubscribe emc-pstc

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
     Jim Bacher:              jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com
     Michael Garretson:        pstc_ad...@garretson.org

For policy questions, send mail to:
     Richard Nute:           ri...@ieee.org

Reply via email to