At 09:26 +0100 3/4/2001, Andrew Wood wrote:
> ----------
From: Nick Williams[SMTP:[email protected]]
Reply To: Nick Williams
Sent: 02 April 2001 17:23
To: John Woodgate
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Equipment for own use (was gas appliance)
This is going to look a bit like I'm picking an argument, which is
not my intention. I am genuinely interested to get some more
information on this if I can.
In the same spirit I am going to challenge your statement below.
I'm interested to know where this idea that equipment which is not in
'free circulation' is excluded from the directives comes from, or
more specifically, what official documentation exists to support it.
I know for a fact that the UK HSE take the view that equipment
manufactured for the maker's own use does have to be CE marked (I
have correspondence from them to this effect) and given that the new
draft of the machinery directive appears to explicitly say this, it
would appear that the Commission agree with them.
I refer to Statutory Instrument 1994 no 3260 cited as The
Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 1994 which is the Enacting
Legislation in the UK for Directive 73/23/EEC (the LVD).
Regulation 14 Prohibition on supply
14-(1) Subject to paragraph (2) below, no person shall supply
any electrical equipment in respect of which requirements of
regulations 5(1) {it must be safe} and 9(1) {it must be CE marked}
above are not satisfied.
{my comment in curly brackets}
14-(2) For the purposes of this regulation a supply shall
include the provision of electrical equipment by a manufacturer for
use in his own premises and where a supply consists solely of such
provision paragraph (1) above shall apply to the supply as if the
words "and 9(1)" were omitted.
It is worth noting that regs 10 (DoC) & 11 (production
control) are not mentioned. This leaves me with the opinion that for
internal use the equipment must be safe and a DoC be drawn up to say
so, but it need NOT be CE marked.
Regulation 12 also appears to exclude secondhand and hired
equipment from regs 9 10 &11.
Any comments?
Best regards, Andy.
Andy:
Useful observations, if I may say so.
This would tend to confirm the view that there is no general
exclusion from the directives for equipment intended for the
manufacturer's own use, since it would appear each directive treats
this situation in its own way. Even where it is not necessary to
actually put the logo on the product, the essential requirements of
the directives still have to be met and this will mean doing an
assessment against the relevant standards.
My reading of reg. 12 is that hired equipment is only excluded if it
has been hired out prior to the implementation date of the directive
(in other words there is no need for equipment pre-dating the
directive to be CE marked just so it can be hired out after the
directive came into force, but if it is first supplied after the date
of full implementation, it will need to be CE marked).
Regards
Nick.
-------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
[email protected]
with the single line:
unsubscribe emc-pstc
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Michael Garretson: [email protected]
Dave Heald [email protected]
For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: [email protected]
Jim Bacher: [email protected]
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/ click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"
