On Fri, 13 Sep 1996, Jim Lyons wrote:
> The PSMA opinion seems pretty clear to me, and I will quote from their
> document "Guidance on CE Marking and Power Supplies":
>
> "4 Low Voltage Directive
>
> 4.1 Component Power Supplies
>
> These will be CE Marked under the Low Voltage Directive by
> manufactureres (sic) declaration to EN60950 with the provision that
> the final equipment manufacturer will be responsible for protection
> against personal contact with live parts."
>
> Of course, TUV says "We are a competent body....." and basically
> shoots down the PSMA as being just an opinion by a manufacturers'
> group. My experience with Competent Bodies is that you
> get a different interpretation or answer depending on which one you
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
In ambiguous situations that is natural, you find the same with
lawywers and physicians
> ask. Sort of goes against the definition of "competent" I would
think.
Can someone enlighten me which of the TUVs you are referring to?
> The problem I have is that the PSMA opinion seems to make a lot of
> sense to me, and I have a problem rationalizing the TUV stand. BTW,
> this is only one particular TUV organization I am referring to, so
> please do not associate all of the TUV organizations with this issue.
> However, I would be very interested in hearing the other TUV opinions
> also.
>
>
>
