In message <[email protected]>,
dated Tue, 21 Jul 2015, Charlie Blackham <[email protected]>
writes:
That standard it is referencing a standard that is no longer "state of
the art" with regard to several sets of limits or frequency ranges. The
chair of the ETSI committee is aware of that problem, and proposed I
described. The discussion also considered that the purpose of standards
is to support Declaration to a Directive, and not certification to the
standard itself.
In such a case, where it's the OJ list that is out-of-date,
manufacturers should indeed consider the latest edition of the
referenced standard in the EMC assessment, but not put it on the DoC.
Manufacturers also, of course, have to deal with reality of market
surveillance which seems to operate a slightly simplistic "current
Harmonised Standard = good / non-current HS = bad" approach.
It's not 'simplistic', it's a legal matter. Your equations do represent
the *legal* position.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. With best wishes. See 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]>
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]>
