reline phones after withdrawal
of the RTTE Directive?
Thanks Charlie. It looks like the scope language for the new LVD/EMCD is
sufficient to pick up wireline telephones without needing the previously
explicit refe
phones after
withdrawal of the RTTE Directive?
Thanks Charlie.
It looks like the scope language for the new LVD/EMCD is sufficient to pick
up wireline telephones without needing the previously explicit references in
the RTTE.
Thanks,
Joe Randolph
Telecom Design Consultant
Randolph
to:j...@randolph-telecom.com]
Sent: 09 February 2018 17:24
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] What EU directive covers wireline phones after withdrawal of
the RTTE Directive?
Hello All:
Sorry to be asking such a basic question, but what is the regulatory framework
for wireline phones n
withdrawal
of the RTTE Directive?
Thanks Charlie.
It looks like the scope language for the new LVD/EMCD is sufficient to pick up
wireline telephones without needing the previously explicit references in the
RTTE.
Thanks,
Joe Randolph
Telecom Design Consultant
Randolph Telecom, Inc.
781-721-28
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] What EU directive covers wireline phones after
withdrawal of the RTTE Directive?
Joe
TTE falls under the EMC Directive and the LVD Directive if within scope
More information in the European Commission "Application of Directives
2014/53/EU, 20
Hello All:
Sorry to be asking such a basic question, but what is the regulatory
framework for wireline phones now that the RTTE directive has been
withdrawn?
I presume that the previously applicable requirements for safety and EMC
still apply. As I recall, these were explicitly called out
Hello all,
On 17. April New list with Harmonised Standards for RTTE Directive
1999/5/EC and Low Voltage Directive 2006/95/EC were brought In OJ.
RTTE:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOC_2015_125_R_000
1
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri
instead of carrying out local testing.
Thanks,
Chris.
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: 21 November 2014 21:54
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] TTE Equipment and RTTE Directive
In message 006601d005d1$a9aaef40$fd00cdc0$@randolph
November 2014 21:54
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] TTE Equipment and RTTE Directive
In message 006601d005d1$a9aaef40$fd00cdc0$@randolph-telecom.com, dated Fri,
21 Nov 2014, Joe Randolph j...@randolph-telecom.com writes:
While compliance with these standards is not a regulatory
: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 3:27 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] TTE Equipment and RTTE Directive
Hi Carl,
What you have surmised is correct. You are not required to meet any line
standards is order to comply with the directives.
The DoCs you are seeing, is the voluntary
In message 006601d005d1$a9aaef40$fd00cdc0$@randolph-telecom.com, dated
Fri, 21 Nov 2014, Joe Randolph j...@randolph-telecom.com writes:
While compliance with these standards is not a regulatory requirement,
some manufacturers (and their customers) feel more comfortable knowing
that a product
and RTTE Directive
Excellent response Larry. When something sounds too good to be true it
usually is. But not in this case.
Thanks very much,
Carl
On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:26:53 -0500, Larry K. Stillings
la...@complianceworldwide.com wrote:
Hi Carl,
What you have surmised is correct. You
: Carl Newton [mailto:emcl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 9:33 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] TTE Equipment and RTTE Directive
Excellent response Larry. When something sounds too good to be true it
usually is. But not in this case.
Thanks very much,
Carl
In message FCA549BE3ECF9D4CB8CB8576837EA48920AB07@ZEUS.cetest.local,
dated Thu, 20 Nov 2014, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
g.grem...@cetest.nl writes:
Note that for a long time the telecom operators had internal test
protocols exceeding TBR21
At least one claimed to do tests
Dear List Members,
I haven't worked with land-line telecom hardware for many years. I have a
device intended for use by handicapped persons that will enable a visual
alarm if the land-line phone is ringing, so the device is listen-only.
I've found what appears to be good and reliable
times a joint NIST - EU meetings (in the
2000's) about the implementation of TTE standards under the RTTE
directive and always got the same response. There are no formal
complaints and therefore no implementation of mandatory standards will
occur. Also, the other reason the directive is going
the implementation of TTE standards under the RTTE
directive and always got the same response. There are no formal
complaints and therefore no implementation of mandatory standards will
occur. Also, the other reason the directive is going to become the Radio
Equipment Directive (RED), as that is all it has ever
FYI
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1410509109080uri=OJ:JOC_2014_313_R_0001
Note, this is now in landscape format. There is an extra column (3) for the
“First publication OJ” date etc.
Regards
Nick
Nick Hooper BSc(Eng) CEng MIET SMIEEE
Chairman RTTE CA
So, would having a DoC with a unique device ID imply the specific
device was tested to the standards listed - 100% production testing?
That would be cost prohibitive, not to mention degrading product
reliability in the case of line surge immunity testing.
Is there something in the recast that
message
From: Pat Lawler plawl...@gmail.com
Date:
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Recast of RTTE directive
So, would having a DoC with a unique device ID imply the specific
device was tested to the standards listed - 100% production testing?
That would be cost
In message 512c27c6.4020...@radiusnorth.net, dated Mon, 25 Feb 2013,
Scott Douglas sdoug...@radiusnorth.net writes:
So who do we complain to about having a unique DofC for each specific
product? How do we get our voices heard?
Contact your National Standards body, (i.e. ANSI, CSI, DIN,
we just do the sensible thing and drop this daft requirement.
T
- Original Message -
From: John Woodgate
Sent: 02/26/13 08:41 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Recast of RTTE directive
In message 512c27c6.4020...@radiusnorth.net, dated Mon, 25 Feb 2013, Scott
Douglas
Subject: Re: [PSES] Recast of RTTE directive
I'm with Scott on this and I appreciate John's advice about canvassing one's
relevant National Standards body.
However, I would like to understand who is driving and supporting the
rquirement for uniquely serialised DoC's and their motives
In message 20130226101739.148...@gmx.com, dated Tue, 26 Feb 2013,
Anthony Thomson ton...@europe.com writes:
So who is driving and supporting the requirement for uniquely
serialised DoC's and what is their technical and economical
justification for doing so.
Probably some enthusiastic
In message 2EC8CC67196B4ED1BB7595C6964E7620@LENVOR61iJOHN, dated Tue,
26 Feb 2013, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk writes:
Surely if this is a real issue, (and I?m not convinced that it is), it
would have to be in the text of the directive(s), and is nothing to do
with standards?
'. Or maybe I've misuderstood the requirement... wouldn't be the first time
I got something wrong.
T
- Original Message -
From: John Cotman
Sent: 02/26/13 10:27 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Recast of RTTE directive
Surely if this is a real issue, (and I’m
: [PSES] Recast of RTTE directive
In message 2EC8CC67196B4ED1BB7595C6964E7620@LENVOR61iJOHN, dated Tue,
26 Feb 2013, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk writes:
Surely if this is a real issue, (and I?m not convinced that it is), it
would have to be in the text of the directive(s
In message 7B529F5F748344499F9D6BA0A8C663C8@LENVOR61iJOHN, dated Tue,
26 Feb 2013, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk writes:
It would defy all common sense if it got in. Among other matters,
there has to be a regulatory impact assessment of any new legislation.
But if people don't
hope you are smiling and crying at the same time.
The Other Brian
-Original Message-
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Scott Douglas
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 10:11 PM
To: John Woodgate
Cc: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Recast of RTTE
-Original Message-
From: Scott Douglas [mailto:sdoug...@radiusnorth.net]
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 9:11 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Recast of RTTE directive
I can tell you that trying to make a unique DofC for each individual unit
serial number is absolutely
In message
617eb8c8634c9149aa66c853d7b8ac53040e4...@by2prd0310mb389.namprd03.prod.o
utlook.com, dated Tue, 26 Feb 2013, Crane, Lauren
lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com writes:
The unique aspect of the problem here is that the unique DoC issue
seems embedded in the New Legislative Frame (NLF)
...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 9:03 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] Recast of RTTE directive
In message d6ee39f37624ae40c6f7b6262384d...@mail.gmail.com, dated Fri,
22 Feb 2013, Peter Tarver ptar...@enphaseenergy.com writes:
errr...yeah. Got interrupted by work
...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Crane, Lauren
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 10:38 AM
To: John Woodgate; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] Recast of RTTE directive
John, since you ask...(but perhaps you only meant the re-scoping)...
The RTTE recast is also be stepping forward
In message
617eb8c8634c9149aa66c853d7b8ac53040e3...@by2prd0310mb389.namprd03.prod.o
utlook.com, dated Mon, 25 Feb 2013, Crane, Lauren
lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com writes:
John, since you ask...(but perhaps you only meant the re-scoping)...
I did mean the re-scoping.
The RTTE recast is also
I can tell you that trying to make a unique DofC for each individual
unit serial number is absolutely unworkable. Not to mention a
documentation and logistics nightmare.
So who do we complain to about having a unique DofC for each specific
product? How do we get our voices heard?
Scott
On
PM
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* [PSES] Recast of RTTE directive
The EU Commission has published a proposal for the recast of the RTTE
Directive, in part intended to bring it in line with the New Legislative
Framework.
Press release
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12
In message 62d7192f666b8ce8f331c708b4440...@mail.gmail.com, dated Fri,
22 Feb 2013, Peter Tarver ptar...@enphaseenergy.com writes:
I’m looking at the proposal now. What I gather from the first 8
pages (of 77) is that it removes all equipment not intentional
radiators from its scope (with an
errr...yeah. Got interrupted by work that pays my salary.
From: John Woodgate
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 09:43
Fri,22 Feb 2013, Peter Tarver ptar...@enphaseenergy.com
writes:
I’m looking at the proposal now. What I gather from
the first 8
pages (of 77) is that it removes all
In message d6ee39f37624ae40c6f7b6262384d...@mail.gmail.com, dated Fri,
22 Feb 2013, Peter Tarver ptar...@enphaseenergy.com writes:
errr...yeah. Got interrupted by work that pays my salary.
Thanks. It looks like good news to me; does anyone see a snag?
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. See
the nerve our employers have - sheesh!!
oh... I think mine are on here too!!!
From: Peter Tarver ptar...@enphaseenergy.com
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 7:27 PM
Subject: RE: [PSES] Recast of RTTE directive
errr...yeah. Got
The EU Commission has published a proposal for the recast of the RTTE
Directive, in part intended to bring it in line with the New Legislative
Framework.
Press release
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-1109_en.htm
Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor
] Recast of RTTE directive
The EU Commission has published a proposal for the recast of the RTTE
Directive, in part intended to bring it in line with the New Legislative
Framework.
Press release
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-1109_en.htm
Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor
In message 01ccdbfa$ee3cf120$cab6d360$@tele.dk, dated Thu, 26 Jan
2012, Helge Knudsen hknud...@mail.tele.dk writes:
Quartz Watches are exempted from the EMC Directive,
I know. But nothing in Europe corresponds to the FCC's numerical limit
of 6 nW, as far as I know.
--
OOO - Own
is valid, and
what is a sound way to test its validity.
Although I cannot find it explicitly in the RTTE directive, I wonder if
there is a similar concept in practice - radio equipment having such low
power levels such that they are considered benign?
Regards,
Lauren Crane (mr.)
KLA
Although I cannot find it explicitly in the RTTE directive, I wonder if
there is a similar concept in practice ? radio equipment having such
low power levels such that they are considered benign?
I haven't seen anything like that.
--
OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
and RTTE directive - out of scope because of power levels?
With regard to the EU EMC Directive, can anyone recommend a rule of
thumb for when it can be said that equipment is a) incapable of
generating or contributing to electromagnetic emissions which exceed a
level allowing radio
From Part 15:
Section 15.103 Exempted devices.
The following devices are subject only to the general conditions of
operation in Sections 15.5 and 15.29 and are exempt from the specific
technical standards and other requirements contained in this Part. The
operator of the exempted device
In message
7b3d1875a9a53142ab5d421ee97d0e6003bbb...@ccsexchange.ccsdomain.ccsemc.co
m, dated Wed, 25 Jan 2012, Michael Heckrotte
michael.heckro...@ccsemc.com writes:
Years ago I recall discussions about electronic wristwatches and FCC
compliance; the power drawn from the watch battery was
-Original Message-
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of John
Woodgate
Sent: 26. januar 2012 04:43
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: EMC and RTTE directive - out of scope because of power levels?
In message
7b3d1875a9a53142ab5d421ee97d0e6003bbb
or EN 60950-1 does not require compliance with EN 50332-1 or -2.
Clause 1.3.Z1 of this standard which is harmonized under the RTTE Directive as
well as under the Low Voltage Directive has the following requirement towards
portable audio equipment:
The apparatus shall be so designed and constructed
Is the RTTE Directive under consideration for a revision? If yes, are there
any draft documents showing the changes being considered?
Thanks,
Bob Heller
St. Paul, MN 55107-1208
Tel: 651-778-6336
Fax: 651-778-6252
-
This message
as ‘Portable’ in the context of the EN 301 489 series of EMC
standards, (harmonised standards for EMC under the RTTE directive).
The trackers are powered by built-in rechargeable cells which are
re-charged as required using a standard off-the-shelf plug-in DC wall-wart
(which we
...@ieee.org wrote on 05/23/2011 07:05:47 AM:
From:
ton...@europe.com
To:
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Date:
05/23/2011 07:06 AM
Subject:
EMC Testing Under RTTE Directive
Sent by:
emc-p...@ieee.org
We make body-worn GPS tracking devices (with GSM communications)
which
We make body-worn GPS tracking devices (with GSM communications) which are
defined as ‘Portable’ in the context of the EN 301 489 series of EMC standards,
(harmonised standards for EMC under the RTTE directive).
The trackers are powered by built-in rechargeable cells which are re-charged
Dear Tony,
You may refer to: Guide to the RTTE Directive 1999/5/EC ( 20 April 2009
version ).
Best Regards,
Derek.
寄件人﹕ Tony T ton...@europe.com
收件人﹕ EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
傳送日期﹕ 2010/10/14 (四) 5:22:11 PM
主題： Re: [PSES] Re： [PSES] Size of NB number
] Size of NB number in RTTE directive.
Hi Derek,
That's interesting and could influence some of my labeling, this is new
information for me. I'd be interested in the normative or mandating source for
this requirement if you can share it.
Thanks in Advance,
Tony
...@yahoo.com.hk
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Sent: Thu, Oct 14, 2010 10:11 am
Subject: [PSES] Re： [PSES] Size of NB number in RTTE directive.
Dear all,
I just found the answer about the format and the NB number should be the same
height as the CE marking.
Best Regards,
Derek
number in RTTE directive.
Any Notified Body will tell you that size doesn’t matter, it’s where you put it
that counts.
I don’t believe there are mandated dimensions for the NB No. IMO common sense
should prevail and it should be clear and legible.
Regards,
Tony
-Original Message
leungderek2...@yahoo.com.hk
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Sent: Thu, Oct 14, 2010 9:28 am
Subject: [PSES] Size of NB number in RTTE directive.
Dear all experts,
Is there any document mention about the format and size of the NB number in
RTTE directive?
Thank you.
Best Regards,
Derek
Dear all experts,
Is there any document mention about the format and size of the NB number in
RTTE directive?
Thank you.
Best Regards,
Derek.
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
Directive 1999/5/EC
Thank you, Charlie, for pointing me to this excellent guidance found on the
Europa web site.
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/
tte/documents/interpretation/#h2-36.-pa
sive-rfid-tags-at-the-stage-of-placing-on-the-market-and-the-rtte
Thank you, Charlie, for pointing me to this excellent guidance found on the
Europa web site.
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/
tte/documents/interpretation/#h2-36.-pa
sive-rfid-tags-at-the-stage-of-placing-on-the-market-and-the-rtte-directive
In answer to my earlier questions
1
Monrad
Guidance available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/
tte/documents/interpretation/#h2-36.-pa
sive-rfid-tags-at-the-stage-of-placing-on-the-market-and-the-rtte-directive
regards
Charlie
From: Monrad Monsen [mailto:monrad.mon...@sun.com]
Sent: 05 January 2010 16:32
1. Are passive RFID tags regulated under the European RTTE Directive
1999/5/EC?
I note that RFID tags can only transmit a weak signal after being energized
and queried by a much more powerful RFID reader. I am confident that RFID
readers must comply with the European RTTE Directive 1999/5/EC
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Published on Dec 15 to correct anomalies with the Dec 2 listing:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Lex
riServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:303:0035:0067:EN:PDF
Brian McAuliffe
Global Regulations Standards, Dell Inc
direct: 353-61-465096
internal:
.nifty.com/tsato/
-Original Message-
From: T.Sato [mailto:vef00...@nifty.ne.jp]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 12:18 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: GPS receiver and RTTE directive
A question.
Does anyone have an idea whether should we apply article 3.2 of the RTTE
directive
Tom,
EN 300 440-1 / -2 latest in the OJ can be used for GPS receivers.
There is a section for receivers in the standard.
Larry
From: T.Sato [mailto:vef00...@nifty.ne.jp]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 12:18 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: GPS receiver and RTTE directive
A question.
Does anyone have an idea whether should we apply article 3.2 of
the RTTE directive to GPS receivers?
And if we should, what harmonised standard can we use for that?
I thought maybe we don't have to apply article 3.2, as GPS receivers
are receive only equipment and will not transmit
, March 06, 2009 6:50 AM
To: Grace Lin
Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: Harmonized Standards for 802.11a/b/g per EU RTTE Directive
Hi Grace,
Historically, I have only been quoted EN 301489-17 for 802.11b/g evaluations
from a large cross-section of test labs and that’s been validated
...@intermec.com
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Grace Lin
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:21 AM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Harmonized Standards for 802.11a/b/g per EU RTTE Directive
Dear Members,
Could you please advise
: Harmonized Standards for 802.11a/b/g per EU RTTE Directive
Dear Members,
Could you please advise the harmonized standard(s) for an 802.11 a/b/g general
purpose handheld controller per EU RTTE Directive? A quick look at the OJ
published list of the harmonized standards
(http://eur-lex.europa.eu
Dear Members,
Could you please advise the harmonized standard(s) for an 802.11 a/b/g general
purpose handheld controller per EU RTTE Directive? A quick look at the OJ
published list of the harmonized standards
(http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Le
UriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:280:0033:0064:EN:PDF
Hi,
I would like to get opinions concerning an issue that has arisen with one of
our customers.
The customer has a radio unit, a sub-configuration (extracted
components/assemblies, software) of a unit already tested fully to the
appropriate RTTE Directive harmonised standards.
Is additional
December 2008 05:30
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Partial testing to RTTE Directive Harmonised Standards
Hi,
I would like to get opinions concerning an issue that has arisen with one of
our customers.
The customer has a radio unit, a sub-configuration (extracted
components/assemblies, software
[mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Bill Stumpf
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 3:08 PM
To: itl-emc user group; emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: RE: D.O.C. to RTTE Directive
David,
Full testing to the applicable Harmonized Standards of the RTTE Directive,
along with a Technical File is needed for compliance
David,
Full testing to the applicable Harmonized Standards of the RTTE Directive,
along with a Technical File is needed for compliance meeting the essential
requirements of that Directive. If partial testing is done (for valid reasons)
or Harmonized Standards are not/cannot be used, consult
Hi All,
Is full testing to applicable ETSI harmonized standards for radio products
under the RTTE Directive mandatory? Or is partial testing and manufacturer's
Declaration of Conformity sufficient?
Thanks in advance for any opinions
Regards
David Shidlowsky
Technical Writer
EMC Laboratory
ITL
Group,
Here is the link for the english versions.
http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2006:201:SOM:EN:HTML
Larry Stillings
Compliance Worldwide, Inc.
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.Website:
Dennis Ward's response is entirely in accordance with 17025 and the
advice given to our lab by NVLAP during lab audit rap-ups (though I
don't believe we ever pursued that route). This applies equally to
calibration labs, whether or internal or external.
Provided the accredited lab has performed
part of this
message if you are not the intended recipient.
Thank you.
_
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Elliott
Mac-FME001
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 12:06 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Accredited Lab / Data Question [RTTE Directive
, please
return to the sender.
_
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Elliott
Mac-FME001
Sent: 04/13/2006 12:06 PM
To: emc-p...@ieee.org
Subject: Accredited Lab / Data Question [RTTE Directive]
Colleagues,
An associate asked me if I would post
compliance
to the RTTE Directive?
My thoughts - The data would not be considered accredited even if the tests
are on the accredited labs scope of accreditation and the accredited lab had
evaluated the non-accredited lab as an approved subcontractor under section
4.5 of ISO 17025 and concluded
Hello group,
Prior to more important things that happened last weekend, the Commission
has published last Friday a new list with HS for the RTTE Directive in the
OJ:
http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2004/c_104/c_10420040430en0022005
7.pdf
One new standard included now is EN301893
10:35 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; h.knud...@niros.com
Subject: Re: EMC Directive, RTTE Directive etc
Anyone know where there are pdfs?
Luke Turnbull
Helge Knudsen h.knud...@niros.com 11/21/03 05:35pm
Dear Group,
I have just recognized new listings in OJ:
RTTE: C271 of 2003-11-12
EMC
marked en.
on the next page choose PDF.
Best regards
Helge Knudsen
From: Luke Turnbull
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org; h.knud...@niros.com
Sent: 24-11-2003 19:34
Subject: Re: EMC Directive, RTTE Directive etc
Anyone know where there are pdfs?
Luke Turnbull
Helge Knudsen h.knud...@niros.com 11
Anyone know where there are pdfs?
Luke Turnbull
Helge Knudsen h.knud...@niros.com 11/21/03 05:35pm
Dear Group,
I have just recognized new listings in OJ:
RTTE: C271 of 2003-11-12
EMC: C271 of 2003-11-12
Medical Devices: C273 of 2003-11-14
And others
Visit:
Dear Group,
I have just recognized new listings in OJ:
RTTE: C271 of 2003-11-12
EMC: C271 of 2003-11-12
Medical Devices: C273 of 2003-11-14
And others
Visit:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/newapproach/standardization/harmstds/wh
atsnew.html
Best regards
Helge Knudsen
Test Approval
owner-emc-pstc@majordocc:
mo.ieee.org Subject: RE: RTTE
Directive Member States Notification
DLS Electronics
166 South Carter St.
Genoa City WI 53128
ph: 262-279-0210
fx: 262-279-3630
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com
EU CAB for EMC and RTTE
From: richwo...@tycoint.com [mailto:richwo...@tycoint.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:32 PM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: RTTE Directive
...@gigabyte.com.tw]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 9:51 PM
To: jheff...@core.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: RTTE Directive Member States Notification
Even though individual country forms do not explicitly suggest the if
applicable condition, just take the initiative to put not considered
Out of curiosity...are there ANY harmonized frequencies in Europe?
Is 13.56 MHz harmonized?
Bob Heller
3M EMC Laboratory, 76-1-01
St. Paul, MN 55107-1208
Tel: 651- 778-6336
Fax: 651-778-6252
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc
[mailto:bstu...@dlsemc.com]
Sent: 02 July 2003 13:59
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: RTTE Directive Member States Notification
Richard Woods wrote: Gerald, please explain why a Notified Body number
is required? I thought that a harmonized ETSI standard exists.
A Notified Body
I understand that Class 1 products use harmonized bands. 13.56 MHz is not
harmonized. Sigh!
Richard Woods
Sensormatic Electronics
Tyco International
From: rehel...@mmm.com [mailto:rehel...@mmm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:05 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: RTTE
: rehel...@mmm.com [mailto:rehel...@mmm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 7:05 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: RTTE Directive Member States Notification
Out of curiosity...are there ANY harmonized frequencies in Europe?
Is 13.56 MHz harmonized?
Bob Heller
3M EMC
[mailto:neil.bar...@e2vtechnologies.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:11 AM
To: 'Bill Stumpf'; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: RTTE Directive Member States Notification
My understanding is that where there is a harmonised standard, but the
spectrum usage is not harmonised
...@mmm.com [mailto:rehel...@mmm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 9:05 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: RTTE Directive Member States Notification
Out of curiosity...are there ANY harmonized frequencies in
Europe?
Is 13.56 MHz harmonized?
Bob Heller
3M EMC Laboratory, 76
I am a little confused about paragraph 31 of the RTTE Directive. I
have copied it below. My understanding is that if our equipment (2.4GHz
outdoor WLAN) operates in a non-harmonised frequency band, then we have
to Notify Member States where it is not harmonised.
Where can I find answers
.
William M Stumpf
DLS Electronics
166 South Carter St.
Genoa City WI 53128
ph: 262-279-0210
fx: 262-279-3630
email: bstu...@dlsemc.com
EMC RTTE CAB
From: Jan Heffken [mailto:jheff...@core.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 9:04 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RTTE Directive Member
I read in !emc-pstc that Jan Heffken jheff...@core.com wrote (in
200307011403.h61e3n69098...@mail4.mx.voyager.net) about 'RTTE
Directive Member States Notification' on Tue, 1 Jul 2003:
Since paragraph 31 uses should and not shall do I have to do it all?
The text you cite is in the 'whereases
Subject: RTTE Directive Member States Notification
I am a little confused about paragraph 31 of the RTTE Directive. I
have copied it below. My understanding is that if our equipment (2.4GHz
outdoor WLAN) operates in a non-harmonised frequency band, then we have
to Notify Member States where
1 - 100 of 185 matches
Mail list logo
