In message <[email protected]>, dated Wed, 24 Sep 2014, Monrad
Monsen <[email protected]> writes:
I note that the quoted statement in EN55032:2012 section 10 gives
freedom to the manufacturer to use another test method or
configuration, but all other parties (including EU member state
governments) would be bound to the "shall" statement to use the "test
method originally chosen ... unless it is agreed by the manufacturer to
do otherwise."
There is more to this that appears. To change the 'shall', CENELEC would
have had to introduce a Common Modification, which is it always very
reluctant to do. Exactly how the Commission has reacted we shall
probably never know, but it is constantly looking out for 'regulatory
statements' in order to exterminate.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Quid faciamus nisi sit?
John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion
list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html
Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used
formats), large files, etc.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <[email protected]>
Mike Cantwell <[email protected]>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher: <[email protected]>
David Heald: <[email protected]>
