Happy New Year, EMC-PSTC listers! 2014/15/EU article 17 separates the conformity assessment procedures for essential requirement 3.1 (safety and EMC) from those which are applied for essential requirements 3.2 and 3.3 (spectrum efficiency and special provisions). Notified Body intervention is required for ER’s 3.2 and 3.3 if the manufacturer has not applied harmonised standards, but no such requirement is applied for ER 3.1.
My reading of this is that the manufacturer has complete freedom of approach under RED for safety and EMC compliance in exactly the same way that they do under the LVD and EMC Directive, and can self-certifiy even if they do not apply harmonised standards, irrespective of whether or not they are required to involve a NoBo for compliance with ER’s 3.2 & 3.3. This is not how things worked under 1999/5/EC. Is my interpretation correct, and if not, why not? - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <sdoug...@ieee.org> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>