Richard, Thanks for the input. As we do with all our radios, we have taken strides prior to approval to ensure that our radio met all national deviations so that we could sell a single device throughout Europe. We did however have to come up with a separate version to take care of Spain and France.
This is why this is somewhat of a surprise to me(Not really). So I guess my question is, what requirement does the BAPT 222 ZV 126 standard have that is not satisfied by ETS 300 328? Or, is it technically equivalent, and they're just being stubborn, in which case all I need to do is add this standard to my DoC? I don't have a copy of the standard, so I am at a loss. Sam Wismer RF Approvals Engineer LXE, Inc. (770) 447-4224 Ext. 3654 Visit Our Website at: http://www.lxe.com -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 10:03 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: RTTE and Germany Sam, you may place RTTE compliant equipment on the market in any member state without any changes. However, the equipment may not be placed in service in a member state until and unless it complies with any additional spectrum, interference and health and safety (EMF) requirements that a state may impose according to Article 7(2). You have just discovered that Germany has imposed non-harmonized spectrum requirements. My equipment has similar problems in Germany, and my equipment cannot be used in Portugal since the frequency is allocated to other equipment. You can find a summary of the spectrum requirements of the CEPT members in CEPT Recommendation 70-03. The document can be found at http://www.ero.dk/ <http://www.ero.dk/> under "documentation". Richard Woods ---------- From: Wismer, Sam [SMTP:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 8:46 AM To: EMC Forum (E-mail) Subject: RTTE and Germany Group, As required by Article 6.4 of the R&TTE directive I made notification to Germany of our intent to place our product on their market. I received a reply advising me that I must re-submit the notification declaring compliance to their national standard BAPT 222 ZV 126, in additon to the essential requirements of the R&TTE Directive. It is my understanding that requiring me to declare compliance to their national standard, is in violation of the of the Directive. I have 2 questions: 1) Is this in violation of the Directive? 2) Is BAPT 222 ZV 126 technically equivalent to ETS 300 328 for which I used to declare compliance to the Directive? Sam Wismer RF Approvals Engineer LXE, Inc. (770) 447-4224 Ext. 3654 Visit Our Website at: http://www.lxe.com ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: [email protected] Michael Garretson: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: [email protected] Michael Garretson: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: [email protected] Michael Garretson: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected]
