Chris
Yes there is a lot of activity in Europe to harmonize limits on human exposure
to non ionizing radiation and make them mandatory to all electrical equipment.
Please see below an article originally posted by Richard Woods that nicely tells
you what is going on. The document 1999/519/EC, available from Europa, gives the
proposed limits.
The current safety limits are based on known effects that can be measured
against know cell biology. In particular for radio communications and mobile
phones, cooking flesh and internal organs. Your internal body temperature
fluctuates by +/-3 degC over the course of the day, so if incident EM fields
cause a greater temp rise, it is deemed hazardous. To show a bit of caution and
learn from the mistakes of Ionizing radiation limits, the NRPB in the UK have
set the limits at 10% of these measured values.
As for the long term risk and effect of low level EM fields on the human body or
brian chemistry, currently no one knows. Research is ongoing and results are
often contradictory, with arguments over measurement techniques, interpretation
of data etc. News reports tend to only highlight the negative in modern
technology, not the good. One comprehensive study performed last year on rats
exposed to mobile phone frequencies, actually showed there memories improved.
Faster times in the hunt the cheese through the maze game. My favorite story on
the subject is where the US Navy has been running their Ultra Low Frequency
transmitter for several years. Basically a 2 km antenna stretched across forest
land. The tress in close proximity to the transmitter grow stronger and taller
than the rest in the forest.
If you interested in further reading try the NRPB web site which details many of
experiments, but again most deal with relatively high level field strengths not
generally encountered by the public, not low level long term exposure. As for
the effect on brain chemistry and effects on personality, a very hard one to
measure.
For us in the product safety business you do need to keep an eye on this one,
IEC60950 does have a little section on Microwave energies and although there is
no set test method, it defines limits for emissions between 1 and 10 GHz.
Current technologies do have EMC emission in the frequencies, although obviously
no where near the limits of the standard.
The following was originally posted by Richard Woods
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
ENTERPRISE DIRECTORATE-GENERAL
Industrial affairs II: Capital goods industries
Mechanical engineering and electrical engineering
Brussels, 9 November 1999
D1/JR-mt
M/032 Revision 1
DRAFT
STANDARDISATION MANDATE ADDRESSED TO CEN, CENELEC AND ETSI IN THE FIELD OF
ELECTROTECHNOLOGY, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Title
Harmonised standards covering the safety aspects of electromagnetic fields
(0 Hz to 300 GHz) generated by apparatus included in the scope of either the
Low Voltage Directive 73/23/EEC (LVD) or the Radio Equipment and
Telecommunications Terminal Equipment (R&TTE) Directive 1999/5/EC.
Purpose
To draft European standards define the safety requirements to protect human
beings from hazardous effects which may be caused by exposure to
electromagnetic waves, emitted by electrical apparatus. These standards are
intended to become harmonised standards giving a presumption of conformity
to Article 2 of Directive 73/23/EEC and
Article 3.1.a of Directive 1999/5/EC.
Introduction
Over a number of years there has been ongoing research in
determining the effects on the human body of exposure to electromagnetic
fields. In addition efforts have also been made to establish reproducible
and reliable measurement and calculation methods for the physical quantities
describing the electromagnetic field.
Electrical apparatus creates electromagnetic fields. The majority of
these apparatus falls under the scope of the Low Voltage Directive 73/23/EEC
and the R&TTE Directive 1999/5/EC.
Risks, caused by these phenomena are covered by the Low Voltage
Directive (see justification below). The R&TTE Directive extends the
applicability of the safety objectives and requirements of the LVD to
equipment, which is in its scope but not in the scope of the LVD. It further
enables a single conformity assessment for all requirements.
In July 1999 a Council Recommendation 1999/519/EC on the limitation
of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300
GHz) was adopted.
It is an update of the previously issued mandate M/032. The update
takes into account the change of directive for Telecommunication Terminal
Equipment from 91/263/EEC to the Radio Equipment & Telecommunications
Terminal Equipment Directive 99/5/EC. The scope of the mandate is broader
and now covers the products covered by the Directive 73/23/EEC and the
phenomena described in Council Recommendation 1999/519/EC.
Justification
Legal Basis
This standardisation mandate falls within the framework of
the Low Voltage Directive and the R&TTE Directive and refers to products
covered by these directives.
Article 2 of Directive 73/23/EEC stipulates that Member
States have to take all appropriate measures to ensure that electrical
equipment may be placed on the market only if, having been constructed in
accordance with good engineering practice in safety matters in force in the
Community, it does not endanger the safety of persons, domestic animals or
property when properly installed and maintained and used in applications for
which it is intended.
The principal elements of the safety objectives are listed
in Annex I of Directive 73/23/EEC. In this case clause 2b is applicable:
"Measures of a technical nature should be prescribed in
accordance with point 1 (of Annex I of Directive 73/23/EEC), in order to
ensure that temperatures, arcs or radiation which would cause a danger, are
not produced".
Article 3 of Directive 1999/5/EC stipulates that the
following essential requirements are applicable to all apparatus:
(a) the protection of the health and the safety of the user
and any other person, including the objectives with respect to safety
requirements contained in Directive 73/23/EEC, but with no voltage limit
applying.
In the introduction of Recommendation 1999/519/EC it is
stated that whereas:
"(12) In order to assess compliance with the basic
restrictions provided in this recommendation, the national and European
bodies for standardisation (e.g. CENELEC, CEN) should be encouraged to
develop standards within the framework of Community legislation for the
purposes of the design and testing of equipment;"
Status of the original mandate
Under the first version of this mandate (M/032) CEN, CENELEC
and ETSI were entrusted to develop standards covering the so-called thermal
effects of radiocommunications equipment operating in the most commonly used
frequency ranges, notably including the frequency ranges used by GSM. In
addition to M/032 the three bodies were entrusted with a programming mandate
to assess the need to develop harmonised standards covering other effects
(M/033). Progress of work under these mandates has not been satisfactory.
The present mandate confirms the need for harmonised
standards as requested by M/032 and incorporates the objectives of M/033,
which is hereby withdrawn.
Description of the Mandate
The European Commission requests that CEN, CENELEC and ETSI prepare
and adopt harmonised standards covering the aspects of exposure of the
general public to electromagnetic fields for equipment covered by Directives
99/5/EC and 73/23/EEC.
Harmonised standards should describe the test methods, test
equipment and calculation methods needed, and take into account the
reference levels and basic restrictions as detailed in Council
recommendation 1999/519/EC to allow a presumption of conformity, taking due
account of international standardisation, scientific evidence and current
technical practise in this sector.
All relevant interested parties at regional and international level
should contribute to the execution of the mandate.
In order to provide a comprehensive solution, the package of
standards shall consist of:
- Generic standards containing measurement methods for EMF
exposure and limits equal to the reference levels for the quantities
described in Annex III, table 2 and 3 of 1999/519/EC.
If necessary they shall also describe the test equipment to be used.
The measurement methods shall take into account the condition of
maximum coupling of the field to the exposed individual as described in
Annex III of 1999/519/EC.
In case of exposure from sources with multiple frequencies, the
calculation of reference levels using the formulae in Annex IV of
1999/519/EC shall be used.
In certain situations, where the exposure is highly localised, the
use of generic measurement standards may not be not appropriate. In such
cases respect of the basic restriction should be addressed directly in
product standards or product family standards. This shall be explained in
the generic standards.
- Risk assessment standards containing the calculation methods
for the current density (J), the Specific energy Absorption (SA), the
Specific energy Absorption Rate (SAR) and the local SAR.
The compliance limits shall be equal to the basic restrictions shown
for the quantities described at Annex III table 1 of 1999/519/EC.
It shall be taken into consideration that the localised basic
restriction on exposure is not to be exceeded.
In case of exposure from sources with multiple frequencies, the
calculation of basic restriction using the formulae in Annex IV of
1999/519/EC shall be used.
- Product - or product-family standards applying the
calculation methods to specific products or product groups, such as hand
held telephones or other products, exposing a high EMF and used directly in
contact with the human body.
In the case of products that are likely to emit EMF with
considerably lower than the reference level, a description of simpler and
less accurate measurement methods and/or measurement equipment can be made,
providing the uncertainties by using such equipment or measurement method
are fully taken into account.
Execution of the Mandate
Designation of the mandate
The Commission hereby entrusts to CEN, CENELEC and ETSI the
mandate as described.
Starting phase
In order to ensure transparency in the work to be carried
out, CEN, CENELEC and ETSI will provide the following information by the end
of June 2000 :
- a programme detailing the standards that will cover the
mandate and the target dates for public enquiry and for adoption;
- an indication of aspects to be modified and/or
supplemented.
As a matter of urgency CEN, CENELEC and ETSI shall complete
the harmonised standard covering mobile GSM handsets, covered by the
original mandate by April 2000.
Implementation of the programme
CEN, CENELEC and ETSI shall implement the submitted
programme.
Progress reports
CEN, CENELEC and ETSI are to inform the Commission at
regular intervals, which in turn will inform the Directive 98/34/EC
Committee Committee and where it concerns equipment within the scope of the
R&TTE Directive its standing Committee (TCAM), of any new draft standard
which might be covered by this mandate, together with the characteristics of
the standard as referred to above.
Transposition of standards
Within six months of their adoption, the European standards
adopted are to be transposed into national standards and the conflicting
national standards are to be withdrawn from the catalogues of the national
standards organisations of Member States.
In this context it should be mentioned that the R&TTE
Directive does not request transposition of standards into national
standards in order to give a presumption of conformity with its essential
requirements.
International co-operation
CEN, CENELEC and ETSI must co-operate with ICNIRP and
co-ordinate the activities in order to avoid any duplication of work. EMF
standards are of international and interregional interest. CEN, CENELEC and
ETSI are therefore also advised to co-ordinate their activities with the
other international standardisation bodies concerned.
Standstill
Acceptance by the European standards bodies of the
standardisation programme will trigger the standstill period referred to in
Article 7 of the Directive 98/34/EC
Chris Chileshe wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I read Hjalmar Arnason's posting on safety markings in Iceland
> and noticed the Tetra number in the signature. I gather that
> the US has decided against the use of Tetra. It is just slowly
> being phased in by Dolphin Telecommunications here in the UK
> and is on trial by a number of the emergency services.
>
> There was an article on Tetra on British television only yesterday
> (06-Feb-2001, Channel 4 news, http://www.channel4.com/news)
> suggesting there were potential hazards with the system.
>
> Anyone out there with definitive knowledge on the effect of the
> Tetra pulsed radio frequency on the brain (calcium cell migration
> leading to changes in behaviour, personality, memory etc) and
> is there a standard being devised for compliance.
>
> Regards
>
> - Chris Chileshe
> - Ultronics Limited
> - Cheltenham, UK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hjalmar Arnason [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 8:47 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Iceland
>
> Hi all
>
> I had already given my comment to Mr. Woods since his was the
> original question but as far as I can tell we accept markings
> in English, Danish, Swedish and Norwegian. I have not seen
> any safety markings in Icelandic on equipment, except on those
> manufact. here.
>
> Those who can read/write English and Icelandic have little
> problem reading the other language's.
>
> For further info try:
>
> http://www.pta.is/
>
> http://www.ls.is/english/english.html
>
> http://www.stjr.is/ivr/
>
> wbr-Hjalmar.
>
> STIKLA ehf
> Hjalmar Arnason
> Manager Technical Operations
> Hlidasmara 11
> 201 Kopavogi
> Iceland
> [email protected]
> gsm. +354 8626265
> nmt. +354 8526265
> tetra.+354 6386265
> ph. +354 5455703
> fax. +354 5455709
> http://www.tetra.is/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf
> Of Gary McInturff
> Sent: 5. februar 2001 16:11
> To: '[email protected]'; [email protected];
> [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Iceland
>
> UL60950 in 1.7.12 "Allows" the following.
> Instructions and equipment marking related to safety shall be in a
> language which is acceptable in the country in which the equipment is
> installed.
> Note 1 - Documentation intended for use only by Service personnel is
> permitted in the English language only.
> Note 2 - Germany, safety related information also for service
> personnel has to be in the German language.
> So if Iceland accepts the harmonized standards they should accept just those
> two. I didn't say I recommend it, but space becomes an issue after awhile.
>
> As a minimum I put the stuff in English, French, and German, then as
> marketing identifies new countries and translate the manual further they end
> up adding additional translations for the safety markings as well.
>
> Someone earlier asked about finding translators. Generally, speaking you can
> find them at nearby universities. They along with some of the professional
> translations services sometimes have problems translating technical
> documents, I assume because of the acronyms and industry-centric vocabulary.
> Gary
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 1:02 AM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Iceland
>
> Richard,
>
> Is the official language in Iceland "Icelandic"? <Yes>
>
> Being a member of the EFTA,I understand that they adopt the EU Declarations
> and
> harmonized standards. <Yes they do>.
>
> In cases where a directive or harmonized standard requires information to be
> in the national language, is Icelandic the only acceptable language? <I am
> not
> sure>.
>
> I previously understood that Norwegian was accepted, but now I am not sure.
> <Norway and Iceland had common language way back in time (some hundreds
> years
> ago). Today Norwegian and "Icelandic" languages are quite different, and I
> am
> quite sure that they do not use/accept/understand Norwegian language up
> north
> in Iceland>.
>
> Amund Westin
> Oslo, Norway
>
> --
> Get your firstname@lastname email for FREE at http://Nameplanet.com/?su
>
> -------------------------------------------
> 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]
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> This message has been checked for all known viruses, by Star Internet,
> delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre.
> For further information visit:
> http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> This message has been checked for all known viruses, by Star Internet,
> delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre.
> For further information visit:
> http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp
>
> -------------------------------------------
> 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]
--
Andrew Carson - Product Safety Engineer
Xyratex Engineering Laboratory
Tele 023 92496855 Fax 023 92496014
