I read in !emc-pstc that Brian Jones <e...@brianjones.co.uk> wrote (in <009001c1a8d0$c4fc0840$d841c0c1@oemcomputer>) about 'SV: Generic emissions - EN 61000-6-3', on Tue, 29 Jan 2002:
>It is not true that all ENs are "harmonised". The term, in this context, >means specifically ENs which have been selected as relevant standards under >one or more directives, and listed as such in the Official Journal. No, that is 'notified', not 'harmonized'. > Thus, >for example, basic standards are not harmonised. Ah, well now, this came up last week. We have to be VERY careful of the terminology. Basic EMC standards (EN61000-4-X) are not *notified*, but obviously they ARE harmonized otherwise there would be even more differences between test-house results in different countries.(;-) However, IEC Basic Safety Publications that are adopted as ENs, such as EN60529, CAN be, and usually are, notified. When harmonization was first introduced, it meant that national standards were brought into line with each other, maybe just in terms of technical requirements but preferably with identical texts. These documents were given 'harmonized' references, such as 'HD21.1 S2'. Some 600 still exist, but a large number have been *superseded by ENs*, which it is MANDATORY for the CENELEC members to implement as identical national standards (apart from Special National Conditions, normally to accommodate conflicting legal requirements). So these ENs are *even more harmonized*, de facto and de jure, than the HDs they replace or stand in place of. It would clearly be totally illogical to claim that HDs, which ARE harmonized by definition, are replaced by ENs which are more closely identical between member states but are not 'harmonized'. > [snip] > >The following is an extract from the Commission's website > >http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/standardization/harmstds/vo >rwort.html > >which explains in detail the extra requirements for harmonised standards. I don't see any 'extra requirements'. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >--------------------------------------- >The "New Approach" directives are supported by "harmonised standards" which >play a significant role in ensuring their application. Such standards have >first the characteristics inherent to European Standards : > >The standards (typically EN, ETSs) are drafted by one of three European >Standard Organisations (CEN,CENELEC, ETSI) > >The work is based on consensus > >Standards are adopted after a public inquiry with the national votes based >on corresponding weighting features > >Standards remain voluntary but their transposition into national standards >and the withdrawal of diverging national standards is mandatory according to >the internal rules of the European Standards Organisations. All this is not 'special' or 'new' or 'additional' in any way, as far as ENs are concerned. > >Within the context of the "New Approach" additional conditions are >superposed to the European Standards to cover the specific role of >harmonised standards : This is typical Brussels Euroenglish, and it can easily be misinterpreted. > >The Commission issues a standardisation mandate according to the procedure >of Directive 98/34/EC (consolidating Directive 83/189/EEC) > >The standards are developed in taking due account of the essential >requirements This is about the *role* of harmonized standards developed in order to allow conformity with the standard to demonstrate compliance with a Directive. It does not, as far as I can see, change the *definition* of a harmonized standard in any way. The 'Euroenglish' bit is actually saying that the Commission *may not accept* an EN that was not produced under a standardization mandate and/or does not, in the Commission's opinion, address the essential requirements. Although it could be seen to attempt, with the words 'additional conditions', to throw the 'harmonized' status of such an EN into doubt, I doubt very much whether that would stick if challenged. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk After swimming across the Hellespont, I felt like a Hero. PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL! ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ 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: Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: No longer online until our new server is brought online and the old messages are imported into the new server.
