David I’ll offer a slightly different angle.
Newer standards, whilst not referenced in the product standard, do represent “state of the art”. There was a discussion recently in the R&TTE compliance association related to the fact that several product type EN 301 489-X standards referenced EN 301 489-1 version 1.8.1 or even 1.4.1. The discussion concluded that whilst final responsibility would always rest with the manufacturer (and Notified Body if used), that using the latest state of the art standard would be perfectly acceptable or perhaps even the better decision. I’m not suggesting that the lab did the correct thing, but the choice of basic EMC standard is only a part of demonstrating EMC compliance and a smaller part of the whole CE marking compliance jigsaw and if that was the only area that wasn’t perfect, then you would be in a pretty good place ☺ Regards Charlie From: Dave Heald [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 20 July 2015 19:52 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [PSES] R&TTE OJ listing vs conflicting Reference Standards in EN 301 489-1 v1.9.2 Hi John, I agree, and this has been my stance with the lab and with our ODM who contracted the lab & had the testing done. Also, the problem doesn't stop with the 55022 reference - for *EVERY* dated (& thus "specific") basic EMC standard that has a newer version, the newer standard was used. For a few, the test method has changed, and this is the sticking point - the lab wants us to pay for any delta testing to the old standards that they technically should have used in the first place. If it is generally acceptable or "good enough" to use the newer standards, I don't want to stand in the way of product release while we get the testing re-done (we know what happens to employees that take stands on technicalities that aren't important in the grand scheme of things & it's not good) However, I also don't want to give in without some input from other experts on how important this is to compliance assessment. Thanks, -David On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 12:18 PM, John Woodgate <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: In message <ca+nn315eg5krv5rgtjbmfqbhkancteqsbuwjkhobpopurog...@mail.gmail.com<mailto:ca%2bnn315eg5krv5rgtjbmfqbhkancteqsbuwjkhobpopurog...@mail.gmail.com>>, dated Mon, 20 Jul 2015, Dave Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> writes: Even though the EN 301 489-1 standard's Normative References list specific dates (and according to the standard, *only* those versions of the standard should be used), is it OK to use the most recent versions of the Reference standards to claim compliance? If a reference is dated, that edition must be used. If it is not dated, the latest edition must be used. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See www.jmwa.demon.co.uk<http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk> When I turn my back on the sun, it's to look for a rainbow 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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> David Heald: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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]<mailto:[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)<http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> David Heald <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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]>
