The application date of EN61000-3-2/3 for ITE has been a difficult problem to resolve. Although the whole would seems to think that the date is 1/1/2001, I have a slightly different view that I would like to offer to the group.
Fundamentally my problem is that the term "dow" is being used synonymously with "doa" - which means date of application. In other words most folks are assuming that the dow IS the application date for ITE. I don't think that is correct. Here is my analysis, please feel free to comment: >EN6100-3-2 is ALREADY in the Official Journal (circa 1995). That >means that the EU member countries should have been enforcing the >standard. However, as this enforcement would have caused huge disruption >to the electronic business, an unofficial decision was made NOT to >enforce the standard until June of 1998 (A12). > >What CENELEC have recommended is that the dow (for conflicting standards >[in this case EN60555-3-2]) is 1/1/2001. CENELEC have also recommended >that A12 to EN61000-3-2 be rescinded. > >Here is the crux of the problem. > >ITE equipment did NOT fall under the 60555 standard. So the dow of >1/1/2001 does not apply to ITE - there are no standards to conflict >with!! > >If the Commission agree with CENELEC and as a result the dow is moved to >2001 and A12 is rescinded - then EN61000-3-2 becomes IMMEDIATELY >effective for ITE. >---------- >From: MartinJP[SMTP:[email protected]] >Sent: Thursday, September 11, 1997 9:02 AM >To: Mark Briggs; [email protected]; [email protected] >Subject: Re[2]: EMC/Harmonics requirements > >In regards to the implementation dates for EN 61000-3-2 and EN 61000-3-3, I >received a letter, dated July 23,1997, from N. Baumier-Duphil Assistant >Secretary of IEC SC 77A. > >The letter states: > >"Actually, the situation is ambiguous. The implementation date of June 1st, >1998 for these two EN was approved (EN 61000-3-2/A12) but was never published >in >OJEC. Then these implementation date do not actually have an official >status. > >During the last BT of CENELEC (July 1-3, 1997), this question was treated. >The >TC 211 of CENELEC , which is in charge of this subject, had proposed to the >BT >to publish the EN 61000-3-2/A12 at the OJEC. The position taken by the BT is >the following: > >5.5.1 DOW for harmonized EMC standards > >D92/195:BT Confirmed that the dow of EN 61000-3-2 and 61000-3-3 remains >2001-01- >01 for all products. An informative document on the consequences of the >decision will be circulated. > >D92/196:In consequence BT decided to launch a 2MV (2 month vote) on the >withdrawl of EN 61000-3-2/A12 which was offered by CENELEC for publication in >the OJEC but was not published by the commission. > >The proposition of the BT must be approved by the European Commission to have >an >official status. The decision is in progress and has not actually been >defined." > >Taking this information into consideration, it is my understanding that >products >which were not covered by the 555 series may not be required to meet >61000-3-2,3 >until Jan. 1, 2001 depending upon the 2 month vote on the withdrawl of >61000-3- >2/A12. > >Does anyone have any information on the results of this 2 month vote?? > >Thanks > >Joe Martin >[email protected] > > >_____________________________________________________________________________ >__ >Subject: Re: EMC/Harmonics requirements >From: Mark Briggs <[email protected]> at INTERNET >Date: 9/9/97 9:27 PM > > >Does this mean that products that are currently being certified against a >product or family standard, such as ITE equipment (EN55022) or ISM >equipment (EN55011) as opposed to a generic standard have to meet the >requirements of the EN61000-3 specs ?? Neither of these standards >mention testing harmonics/flicker or the IEC 555 specs. > >Mark > >[email protected] > > >>______________________________ Reply Separator >_________________________________ >>Subject: EMC/Harmonics requirements >>Author: [email protected] at PMDF >>Date: 8/22/97 10:40 AM >> >> >>To All: >>For information. >> >>The European Union has put out a notice to all national committees aimed >>at clarifying the implementation dates for the harmonics and flicker >>standards. (Reference TC741 JPV/is/970722 dated 1997-07-10) They have >>also referenced the 555 series standards and in their minds clarified the >>relationship between the two harmonics standards. The notice is copied >>below for your information. Please note the IEC 555 -2 and 555-3 are >>withdrawn and obsolete. This means CENELEC is not using an international >>standard for those products covered. >> >>Dave George >> >> >>"Taking into account the above, for products originally not >>falling within the scope of EN 60555-2/EN 60555-3 but covered by EN >>61000-3-2/EN 61000-3-3, presumption of conformity to the ERs of the EMC >>Directive exists and is confirmed on the basis of a manufacturer's >>declaration based on the generic EMC standards up to 2001-01-01. >> >>In this context reference is made to Note 2 to Table I of EN 50021-1 >>(relating to emission in the a.c. mains supply and in particular >>harmonics) which reads: >> >>"Note 2: Applicable to apparatus covered within the scope of EN 60555-2 >>and EN 60555-3. Limits for apparatus not currently covered by EN 60555-2 >>and EN 60555-3 are under consideration.' >> >>In consequence the levels given in these two standards applicable to the >>relevant phenomena can be used for conformity assessment purposes under >>the manufacturer's responsibility." >> >> >> >>Received: from 192.168.190.1 by ALPHA.CORP.SCIATL.COM (PMDF V4.3-13 #7203) >> id <[email protected]>; Fri, >> 22 Aug 1997 14:59:15 -0500 (EST) >>Received: from [199.172.136.3] by gatekeeper.sciatl.com for >> <[email protected]> id PAA14535; Fri Aug 22 15:04:07 1997 >>Received: (from daemon@localhost) by ruebert.ieee.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) >> id LAA10936; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 11:42:35 -0400 (EDT) >>Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 11:40:31 -0400 >>From: "George, David L" <[email protected]> >>Subject: EMC/Harmonics requirements >>Sender: [email protected] >>Reply-to: "George, David L" <[email protected]> >>Message-id: >> <c=US%a=_%p=UNISYS%[email protected] >>isys.c >>om> >>X-Envelope-to: "Kealey, Doug%SA-B08"@ccmail.corp.sciatl.com >>MIME-version: 1.0 >>X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version >>4.0.995.52 >>Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit >>Precedence: bulk >>X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients <[email protected]> >>X-Listname: emc-pstc >>X-List-Description: Product Safety Tech. Committee, EMC Society >>X-Info: Help requests to [email protected] >>X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to [email protected] >>X-Moderator-Address: [email protected] >> >
