Our products operate below 100 kHz in the near magnetic field. We fail the
derived limits of the Recommendation; but using computer models, we can
demonstrate compliance with the basic limits of current density. I would
like to find out if others are taking this approach and perhaps share
information in that regard.
Richard Woods
----------
From: Kathy Maclean [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 9:20 PM
To: '[email protected]'
Cc: [email protected]; Jacek Wojcik
Subject: RE: Using RTTE directive before April 2000?
Richard -
What details would you like to know? In general, you may already be
aware that there is a Council Recommendation with respect to this,
also.
I will post the number of this tomorrow. We are hearing from many
manufacturers who are seeking evaluation for SAR (Specific
Absorbtion
Rate) for this purpose. and just returned from the UK, where the
folks
at BABTPS had me brief some of their clients in a workshop format.
Incidentally, the Canadian RSS 102 has also been released and is now
a
requirement. Contact me if you need a copy and I will email it to
you.
Kate
Kathy MacLean
President, APREL Laboratories
- Consulting - Research - Training - Certification Testing -
- EMC - Wireless - Antennas - Environmental - Acoustics - CE -
MPE/SAR
51 Spectrum Way, Nepean, Ontario K2R 1E6
Tel (613) 820-2730 Fax (613) 820-4161 Cell (613) 791-3777
http://www.aprel.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 1:45 PM
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Using RTTE directive before April 2000?
>
>
> I am curious to know how other companies that have radio
> equipment plan to
> demonstrate compliance with the "health and safety" (code
> words for EMF)
> requirements of the R&TTE.
>
> Richard Woods
>
> ----------
> From: Cynthia Pleach [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 1:32 PM
> To: 'Corinne SALINGRE'; [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Using RTTE directive before April 2000?
>
> The R&TTE does not reduce the amount of work needed,
> just eliminates
> the need for a notified body to check the work, You
> still need to
> conduct
> tests to the same standards and you still need to have some
type
> of control over the maintenance of approval.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Corinne SALINGRE
[mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 11:59 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Using RTTE directive before April 2000?
>
>
> Of course you are true.
> I was saying that you have all the transition time (8
> april 2000-7
> april 2001) to change from TTE-SES into R&TTE. Normally it
> gives you time to
> do the job !
> And in most cases the R&TTE reduces the work to be done in
the
> formal approval process.
>
> (but I guess we will have to do the work, but in a voluntary
> compliance process, according to what our customers requires.)
>
>
>
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>
> Folks, you are forgetting that any product that is
> first placed on
> the
> market prior to April 8 can continue to be sold for an
> additional
> year at
> which time it must comply with the R&TTE procedures.
>
> Richard Woods
>
>
> ----------
> From: Corinne SALINGRE
> [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 5:13 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Using RTTE directive before April
2000?
>
>
> In the case of the R&TTE, the application date will
be 8
> april 2000
> for all members states (not before, not after).
> Some countries will have legislative problems
> to achieve the
>
> transposition at that precise moment. However the
> Directive will be
> applicable even in that cases (that can lead to nice
> questions on
> how could
> you break a law that has not yet been transposed in
> that country, or
> how can
> the market surveillance authority be designated in the
> absence of
> the law
> !).
> In France also, the transposition into national
> law is said
> to be
> ready for 8 april.
> In my opinion, if your product is to be
> introduce in very
> early
> 2000, you will have better to use the TTE-SES directive
approval
> scheme and
> plan to change it into R&TTE before 7 april 2001 .
> And even if the R&TTE excludes some technical
> aspects (as
> not being
> essential requirements), my customers and the operators
> will still
> require
> these testings (preferrably done by external tests houses).
> I feel that the only difference is the person whom
these
> tests are
> essential for ! (notified body now and my customer
> after 8 april !)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>
> Listmembers:
>
>
> I have a question that perhaps some of
> you can help
> me with.
> I'm developing
> a regulatory compliance plan for a new
telecom
> product that
> is scheduled to
> begin shipping in the first quarter of
> 2000. The
> exact date
> is not certain,
> but it is likely to be before the April
> 8, 2000 date
> that
> appears in the RTTE
> directive.
>
>
> If possible, I would like to avoid the whole
> notified body
> route called out
> by the current directive 98/13/EC,
> especially since
> it would
> only be required
> for the brief period until April 2000.
>
>
> I seem to recall that a new directive
> can be used as
> soon as
> *any* member
> state has transposed it into national
> law. If so,
> this
> suggests that the
> RTTE directive could be used prior to
> April 2000 if
> at least
> one member state
> has transposed it into national law.
>
>
> In the case of the UK, however, recent
> postings on
> the
> emc-pstc listserver
> indicate that the draft legislation for
> the UK calls
> out an
> effective date of
> April 8, 2000. In other words, even if the
UK
> transposes
> the directive prior
> to April 2000, the national law itself
> will call out
> an
> effective date of
> April 8. I do not know what the other
> member states
> are
> planning to do.
>
>
> So, am I stuck with using directive
> 98/13/EC and the
>
> notified body route if
> the product ships prior to April 8, 2000?
>
>
> Joe Randolph
> Telecom Design Consultant
> Randolph Telecom, Inc.
>
>
<<File: vcard.vcf>>
