Folks, Article 6(3) of the R&TTED requires that "Member States shall ensure that the manufacturer or the person responsible for placing the apparatus on the market provides information for the user on the intended use of the apparatus, together with the declaration of conformity to the essential requirements."
Therefore, not only should one refrain from making statements about DoC without expanding the term, one should also refrain from making generalisations about ALL directives when in fact the detail of what information is to be provided varies. The fact that the European Commission published both a Directive and a Decision a number of years back which were supposed to define a framework to achieve consistency twixt future directives (the ‘Global Approach’) does not mean that consistency actually exists. The LVD requires one thing as regards Declarations of Conformity, the R&TTED requires another – and even the information to be provided in such a declaration can vary. Just as well they didn't call it the 'Consistent Approach'. Not a new point (as in I'm sure I've said something similar in the past), but one that seems necessary to be made from time to time. Regards, Richard Hughes This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: [email protected] Dave Heald: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] Jim Bacher: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
