French Guinea
Does anyone know what the EMC and safety requirements are for French Guinea? Thanks, Mike Cantwell, PE RheinTexas, Inc. Suite 150 1701 East Plano Parkway Plano, TX 75074 mailto:cantw...@flash.net Web Site: http://www.RheinTech.com Tel: (972) 509-2566 Fax: (972) 509-0073 - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Tranceiver regulations within hospitals
Can anyone out there tell me if there are any regulations out there for the use of tranceivers in hospitals in the uk and euorpe. Many Thanks Simon Longstaff Mason Communications Ltd UK - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335
Nick, the IEC has immunity provisions for household equipmentit is CISPR 14-2. Does IEC 60335-1 reference this standard at all? Bob Heller === === Nick Williams n...@conformance.co.uk on 02/28/99 06:36:10 AM Please respond to Nick Williams n...@conformance.co.uk To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org cc:(bcc: Robert E. Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US) Subject: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335 Readers may be interested to know that the IEC committee responsible for IEC60335 have proposed an addition to section 19 of IEC60335-1 which will incorporate EMC performance tests into the standard for the first time. For those not completely familiar it, IEC60335-1 is the general requirement for household appliances and section 19 is the abnormal operating conditions section which is intended to ensure a product cannot catch fire, explode or otherwise malfunction in a dangerous way when subjected to forseeable abuse. Providing, as it does the basis, for the LVD harmonised standard EN60335 as well as other standards used in almost every other part of the world for electrical safety of household and small commercial appliances, this standard probably affects more equipment used in more homes worldwide than any other single safety standard. The newly proposed clauses are all intended to test the immunity of the product to EMC conditions to ensure that appliances which contain electronic controls do not become dangerous if the operation of those controls is disturbed by EMC related phenomena. For those interested in the details, the draft for public comment, reference number 98/264884DC, is available from the BSI. Outside the UK, if you want to contact your local standard supplier, the IEC committee draft number is 61/1547/CD. (Note - the last date for comments has now passed for the BS consultative document, and presumably for the IEC draft as well.) I should stress that this proposal relates to the IEC standard. Presumably, national/harmonised implementations of the standard in places where there are already EMC immunity provisions (EU and Australia/NZ etc.) will not need to implement this additional set of requirements. Others better qualified than I on this aspect may like to comment. Nick. - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335
I am working from the EN implementation of the published standard (BSEN60335-1:1995, including amendments 8913 (oct 95) 9475 (may 97) and 10168 (jan 99). According to anex NA, which lists the differences between the BS document and the IEC original, CISPR 11 and CISPR 14 were mentioned in the introduction to the IEC standard as standards dealing with non-safey aspects of household appliances. This reference has been excised from the EN document. I am not qualified to state what existing standard (if any) the proposed new immunity tests are based on or similar to, but the proposed amendment will add the following standards to the list of normative references in the IEC standard: IEC 61000-4-2, IEC 61000-4-3, IEC 61000-4-4, IEC 61000-4-5, IEC 61000-4-6, IEC 61000-4-11. Comments? Nick. At 07:28 -0600 1/3/99, rehel...@mmm.com wrote: Nick, the IEC has immunity provisions for household equipmentit is CISPR 14-2. Does IEC 60335-1 reference this standard at all? Bob Heller == SNIP - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335
Nick, the basic immunity standards that you call out below are the same ones called out in both the EN and IEC versions of the EMC household immunity standards CISPR 14-2 and EN 55014-2. CISPR 11 and CISPR 14 (14-1) are emission standards. Is this the wave of the future? Will safety standards add EMC requirements? Will EMC immunity requirements become necessary in the U.S. through OSHA or other safety agencies? Any other thoughts out there? Bob Heller === == Nick Williams n...@conformance.co.uk on 03/01/99 08:23:41 AM To: Robert E. Heller/US-Corporate/3M/US cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335 I am working from the EN implementation of the published standard (BSEN60335-1:1995, including amendments 8913 (oct 95) 9475 (may 97) and 10168 (jan 99). According to anex NA, which lists the differences between the BS document and the IEC original, CISPR 11 and CISPR 14 were mentioned in the introduction to the IEC standard as standards dealing with non-safey aspects of household appliances. This reference has been excised from the EN document. I am not qualified to state what existing standard (if any) the proposed new immunity tests are based on or similar to, but the proposed amendment will add the following standards to the list of normative references in the IEC standard: IEC 61000-4-2, IEC 61000-4-3, IEC 61000-4-4, IEC 61000-4-5, IEC 61000-4-6, IEC 61000-4-11. Comments? Nick. - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335
Folks, I posed the question of Immunity standards being enforced in the USA to Art Whal(?) of the FCC. He did not see the need for immunity enforcement. After a lengthy discussion I formed the opinion that it is most likely the FCC will never press this issue, it will have to come from another STDs body. Pity the USA isn't as organized as Europe;-) Derek. - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335
From: lfresea...@aol.com Subject: Re: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335 Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 13:11:30 EST To: rehel...@mmm.com, n...@conformance.co.uk Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Folks, I posed the question of Immunity standards being enforced in the USA to Art Whal(?) of the FCC. He did not see the need for immunity enforcement. After a lengthy discussion I formed the opinion that it is most likely the FCC will never press this issue, it will have to come from another STDs body. Pity the USA isn't as organized as Europe;-) Derek. Derek: I think that immunity requirements for the USA commercial market are likely about 5 years away. After about a year of argument, the FCC will probably cut them in over a three-year transition period. That's my Euro's worth. BTW, in the mid 60's, Newton Minnow, then FCC Chairman, obliquely addressed European (uhh, we were only thinking VDE way back then) regulatory practices when he said: In the US, all things which are not specifically prohibited are allowed; in Germany, all things not specifically allowed are prohibited! So, where's the pity? I didn't raise my son to be a lawyer. ;-) Ed -- Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA. USA 619-505-2780 List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 03/01/1999 Time: 12:45:46 -- - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335
Derek, As Art Wall told you, at this point FCC does not see enough justification to enforce compliance with EMC immunity standards. FCC might change their mind, don't worry. Procedure will require wide prior consultations with industry and end users. Sometimes Europe is too organized, remember recent discussion about odors, I would add harmonics, flicker, magnetic field, etc... and created heaven for test labs. Mirko -Original Message- From: lfresea...@aol.com [SMTP:lfresea...@aol.com] Sent: Monday, March 01, 1999 10:12 AM To: rehel...@mmm.com; n...@conformance.co.uk Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject:Re: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335 Folks, I posed the question of Immunity standards being enforced in the USA to Art Whal(?) of the FCC. He did not see the need for immunity enforcement. After a lengthy discussion I formed the opinion that it is most likely the FCC will never press this issue, it will have to come from another STDs body. Pity the USA isn't as organized as Europe;-) Derek. - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335
This question came up a couple of years ago at the IEEE EMC Symposium. Art was the speaker and he indicted then that immunity requirements were considered to be a marketing issue, so the FCC had no plans in that area. By a show of hands, the only people in the audience that supported mandatory immunity requirements were associated with military procurement. So, don't expect the FCC or any private standards organization to press this issue. It should be noted that the FDA has opened an investigation on immunity of medical equipment, so there will most likely be some new requirements for that type of equipment. -- From: lfresea...@aol.com [SMTP:lfresea...@aol.com] Sent: Monday, March 01, 1999 1:12 PM To: rehel...@mmm.com; n...@conformance.co.uk Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: Re: New EMC requirements proposed for IEC60335 Folks, I posed the question of Immunity standards being enforced in the USA to Art Whal(?) of the FCC. He did not see the need for immunity enforcement. After a lengthy discussion I formed the opinion that it is most likely the FCC will never press this issue, it will have to come from another STDs body. Pity the USA isn't as organized as Europe;-) Derek. - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
EMC and Software
Could someone provide their knowledge of or resources for the control or mitigation of EMI through the use of software? Thanks, Bob Heller 3M Company - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: C Tick..
George, See Comments below. -- From: Sparacino,George[SMTP:sparaci...@andovercontrols.com] Reply To: Sparacino,George Sent: Friday, February 26, 1999 4:25 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: C Tick.. Good day, I was asked to investigate what is required to obtain the C tick for our products. Our products have been evaluated to the applicable stds as prescribed by the EMC directive for ITE equipment (emissions immunity). My Questions: I understand that the c tick marking is a required marking of EMC approval for electronic devices. Does this cover both emissions immunity ? or just emissions ? Just emissions. Can I request applications myself (I'm in the USA) or do I need an Australian rep to do this ? An Australian National must make the initial application that assigns a number to your products via the importer or the Australian branch of your company. This number is part of the C-tick mark logo placed on each product. Could I present my existing reports / certificates (created to satisfy EMC directive), or am I required to generate new ones in a specified (ACA) report format. Your existing reports are sufficient to be legal. However, in the case of conflict, the results of an Australian lab have the final say. Thanks for any help you can give me. George Good luck, Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic The comments above are my opinions and do not necessarily reflect that of my company. - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: C Tick..
Dear George, The changes in the Telecom and Radio Acts mean that there are now criminal penalties imposed upon the 'Permit Holder' [importer or (Australian) manufacturer] of equipment that breaches the conditions of the Acts. An example of the penalties are given below :- Extract from The tics Newsletter Vol.1 Iss.2 Section 407 of the Telecommunications Act 1997 states that a penalty unit is equivalent to Aus$110 [see s4AA of the Crimes Act 1914], it also states that 1. A false declaration on the Approval Application Form by an individual is 100 penalty units and 500 penalty units for a corporation. 2. If found guilty of supplying unlabelled customer equipment, the 'Permit Holder' is punishable on conviction of a fine not exceeding 100 penalty units. 3. If found guilty of supplying labelled customer equipment before meeting any of the requirements under Section 408(5) of the Act, the 'Permit Holder' will face a fine not exceeding 100 penalty units. 4. If found guilty of failing to retain records of the approved customer equipment, the 'Permit Holder' will face a fine not exceeding 100 penalty units. 5. If found guilty of applying labels to the approved customer equipment which contain false statements about compliance with standards, the 'Permit Holder' will face a fine not exceeding 120 penalty units. (Currently equal to Aus$13,200) You mentioned ITE, what exactly are you intending to import as there may be additional compliance areas you may need to consider. The type of equipment will also determine whether third party test reports are mandatory. Only EMC Emissions are currently required, testing of ITE Telecoms equipment to AS/NZ 3548 must be performed by a suitably accredited RTA (NATA Recognised Testing Authority). You will also need to consider AS/NZ 3260 (equiv. IEC 950) and TS 001 if your product is Telecom related. Test reports must be held in the compliance folder and made available for inspection by the appropriate regional office of the ACA. My company European Technology Services (Australia) Pty Ltd operate an Australian Agency Service (AAStm) which takes on the legal representation liabilities for Australia and ultimately act as the competent engineering function required by the ACA. The advantage of having an independent organisation, with none of the usual commercial hang-ups associated with distributors, is that you only have one supplier code number to apply and only one set of compliance documentation to update. Leaving the distribution channels open to ship product. You may wish to browse the ACA web site http://www.sma.gov.au/ for further confirmation of applicable requirements. Send me an email off-line if you need further guidance on the standards or compliance areas you will need to consider. Best regards, Edward Fitzgerald Director, European Technology Services Specialist Communications Compliance Consultancy With offices in the UK, Australia and Canada asia-pac.off...@ets-tele.com -Original Message- From: UMBDENSTOCK, DON [ mailto:umbdenst...@sensormatic.com] Sent: 01 March 1999 13:13 To: emc-p...@ieee.org; 'Sparacino,George' Subject: RE: C Tick.. George, See Comments below. -- From: Sparacino,George[SMTP:sparaci...@andovercontrols.com] Reply To: Sparacino,George Sent: Friday, February 26, 1999 4:25 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: C Tick.. Good day, I was asked to investigate what is required to obtain the C tick for our products. Our products have been evaluated to the applicable stds as prescribed by the EMC directive for ITE equipment (emissions immunity). My Questions: I understand that the c tick marking is a required marking of EMC approval for electronic devices. Does this cover both emissions immunity ? or just emissions ? Just emissions. Can I request applications myself (I'm in the USA) or do I need an Australian rep to do this ? An Australian National must make the initial application that assigns a number to your products via the importer or the Australian branch of your company. This number is part of the C-tick mark logo placed on each product. Could I present my existing reports / certificates (created to satisfy EMC directive), or am I required to generate new ones in a specified (ACA) report format. Your existing reports are sufficient to be legal. However, in the case of conflict, the results of an Australian lab have the final say. Thanks for any help you can give me. George Good luck, Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic The comments above are my opinions and do not necessarily reflect that of my company. - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the
RE: C Tick..
One further note: I believe a U.S. lab that is accredited by either AALA or NVLAP is considered a certified lab under mutual recognition agreement. However, I'm not sure of the current status of the MRA. Jim Hulbert Pitney Bowes -- Forwarded by Jim Hulbert/MSD/US/PBI on 03/01/99 02:33 PM --- From: WOODS RICHARD wo...@sensormatic.com AT SMTPGWY on 03/01/99 08:58 AM To: emc-p...@ieee.org AT SMTPGWY@pbiccmail, 'Sparacino George' sparaci...@andovercontrols.com AT SMTPGWY@pbiccmail cc:(bcc: Jim Hulbert/MSD/US/PBI) Subject: RE: C Tick.. George you can find a complete description of the requirements at http://www.sma.gov.au/ http://www.sma.gov.au/ . Only emissions are required. The person residing in Australia and responsible for placing the product on the market is responsible for making the application. Reports are not required to be submitted, but must be available for inspection. Existing reports are acceptable, however, the authorities have the right to accept reports only from certified labs. -- From: Sparacino,George [SMTP:sparaci...@andovercontrols.com] Sent: Friday, February 26, 1999 4:26 PM To: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: C Tick.. Good day, I was asked to investigate what is required to obtain the C tick for our products. Our products have been evaluated to the applicable stds as prescribed by the EMC directive for ITE equipment (emissions immunity). My Questions: I understand that the c tick marking is a required marking of EMC approval for electronic devices. Does this cover both emissions immunity ? or just emissions ? Can I request applications myself (I'm in the USA) or do I need an Australian rep to do this ? Could I present my existing reports / certificates (created to satisfy EMC directive), or am I required to generate new ones in a specified (ACA) report format. Thanks for any help you can give me. George - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). RFC822.TXT Description: Text - character set unknown
Fw: RE: EMC and Software
Posted for Jim Knighten: From: Knighten, Jim knigh...@trans.sandiegoca.ncr.com Subject: RE: EMC and Software Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 09:54:44 -0800 To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org, rehel...@mmm.com Bob, Before I respond to this, could you please elaborate a little. I am not certain I understand what you are asking for? Jim Knighten Dr. Jim Knighten e-mail: jlknigh...@ieee.org Senior Consulting Engineer NCR 17095 Via del Campo San Diego, CA 92127 http://www.ncr.com Tel: 619-485-2537 Fax: 619-485-3788 -- From: rehel...@mmm.com Sent: Monday, March 01, 1999 6:03 AM To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org Subject: EMC and Software Could someone provide their knowledge of or resources for the control or mitigation of EMI through the use of software? Thanks, Bob Heller 3M Company -- Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA. USA 619-505-2780 List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 03/01/1999 Time: 10:12:22 -- - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Fw: RE: EMC and Software
Posted for Bruce Hunter: From: Bruce Hunter bru...@thomson-csf.com.au Subject: RE: EMC and Software Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 07:54:15 +1100 (EST) To: rehel...@mmm.com Cc: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org On Mon, 1 Mar 1999 rehel...@mmm.com wrote: Sorry for not being clear: I have received and read a fair amount of data on the containment and recovery from ESD spikes through the use of software. Can software also control and/or limit the amount of emissions from equipment? Harmonics? Voltage variations? I know the question is broad and the answers may be equipment specific. But when software and hardware design engineers get together on a design, are there any general rules of thumb or specifics that they should be aware of in terms of EMC? There are various software techniques to filters the effects of transients and interference on input circuits with embedded software based products. There range from averaging, successive sampling and comparison through to signal analysis and recovery. One important rule of thumb is that software cannot recover information where it doesn't exist. On the issue of ESD spikes, its seems that you are trying to recover from a software crash induced by hardware susceptibility to transients. There are various techniques that can be used from watchdog timers, program boundary checking, cyclic reset and run operation etc. If the failure can result in a hazardous condition rather than an unreliable product then you have a different and a more serious problem. In this case you would need to establish and prove the safe operation of this product by formal management of the functional safety of the product. You can look at IEC61508 (Functional safety of electrical/ electronic/ programmable electronic safety related systems) for guidance here. Part 6 of this standard has a good library of techniques to handle software and hardware failures. UL1998 also has a list of useful measures to address the results of hardware failures and malfunctions on software. I hope this helps... Bruce Hunter email: bru...@thomson-csf.com.au Thomson-CSF Pacific Phone: +61 2 9981 0630 Fax: +61 2 9971 1759 176 South Creek Road, Dee Why, NSW 2099, Australia ---End of Original Message- -- Ed Price ed.pr...@cubic.com Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab Cubic Defense Systems San Diego, CA. USA 619-505-2780 List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org Date: 03/01/1999 Time: 13:01:59 -- - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
RE: EN 50082-1:1992 vs 1997
The import date is not the correct date to use. Every copy of a new product that is placed on the market or placed in service after the effective date must comply with the new requirements. Note that old products may remain in distribution and sold after that date. New standards do not apply to used or repaired equipment that remains within the EU, but they do apply to used or repaired equipment imported into the EU after the effective date. There are similar requirements for certain levels of refurbished equipment. The Commission has given its official position of when refurbished equipment becomes like new and needs to comply with the new standards. Perhaps someone can point you to the web site for their official comments. -- From: Collins, Erik D. [SMTP:collin...@lxe.com] Sent: Monday, March 01, 1999 3:15 PM To: 'emc-pstc' Subject: EN 50082-1:1992 vs 1997 I have a question regarding the applicability of EN 50082-1:1992 vs. EN 50082-1:1997. It is my understanding that as of July 1, 2001, all products that are still being shipped into the EU must comply with EN 50082-1:1997. What if the products originally met EN 50082-1:1992 and are no longer being shipped but are still being repaired or replaced after July 1, 2001. Do these products have to meet EN 50082-1:1997 as well? Best Regards Erik D. Collins EMI/EMC Approvals Engineer LXE Inc. 125 Technology Parkway Norcross, GA 30092 USA Phone 770-447-4224 x3240 Fax 770-447-6928 Check out our website @: http://www.lxe.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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators). - 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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
Re: CE mark self certification
Hi Dan: Can anyone explain the advantages/disadvantages of going through a notified body for CE Mark as opposed to self certifying? It costs a load of money to retain the services of a notified body and I was wondering what you really get from it. Its a business decision. Assuming the documentation takes the same amount of time, regardless whether a NCB or you... If you use a NCB, your company pays them for their work and their profit. You can do something else. If you prepare a TCF, your company pays you for the work, but doesn't pay anyone any profit. You should be faster than the NCB (since you know your product well). So it should be less costly to do the TCF. But, you can't do something else. What do you get from the NCB? A document. What do you have with a TCF? A document. The only advantage of using the NCB is that the document might be less prone to a critical review by authorities than a TCF. If you are going to other countries outside the EU, a CB Certificate and Test Report can be used to quickly and reasonably obtain any necessary certifications. Otherwise, its one test per country. Best regards, Rich - Richard Nute Product Safety Engineer Hewlett-Packard Company Product Regulations Group AiO Division Tel : +1 619 655 3329 16399 West Bernardo Drive FAX : +1 619 655 4979 San Diego, California 92127 e-mail: ri...@sdd.hp.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, j...@gwmail.monarch.com, ri...@sdd.hp.com, or roger.volgst...@compaq.com (the list administrators).
