CEPT ERC REPORT 78-2000 Market Surveillance Aspects of Enforcement for Radio Equipment (Helsinki January 2000)《无线电设备执行市场监督方面 赫尔辛基2000年1月》.pdf

《CEPT ERC REPORT 78-2000 Market Surveillance Aspects of Enforcement for Radio Equipment (Helsinki January 2000)《无线电设备执行市场监督方面 赫尔辛基2000年1月》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《CEPT ERC REPORT 78-2000 Market Surveillance Aspects of Enforcement for Radio Equipment (Helsinki January 2000)《无线电设备执行市场监督方面 赫尔辛基2000年1月》.pdf（11页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、o STD-CEPT ERC REPORT 78-ENGL 2000 23261139 OOLb5b8 78b W ERC REPORT 78 European Radiocommunications Committee (ERC) within the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) MARKET SURVEILLANCE ASPECTS OF ENFORCEMENT FOR RADIO EQUIPMENT Helsinki, January 2000 STD-CEPT E

2、RC REPORT 78-ENGL 2000 232b9L9 003ib5b7 bL2 ERC REPOR? 18 Copyright 2000 the European Conference of Postul and Telecornniunicriiicms Administrations (CEPT) P STDmCEPT ERC REPORT 78-ENGL 2000 = 232bLilLi 00Lb570 33Li ERC REPORT 78 INDEX TABLE I INTRODUCTION 1 1 . 1 Purpose of this Report i 1.2 Defini

3、tions 1 1.3 Differences of approach between legislation in the various countries and impact on the wording . 2 2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF NATIONAL MARKET SURVEILLANCE SITUATION WITHIN THE CEPT MEMBER COUNTRIES . 2 3 JUSTIFICATION/OBLIGATIONS TO ORGANISE MARKET SURVEILLANCE FOUND IN NATIONAL OR EU REGULAT

4、IONS AND CEPT DECISIONSRECOMMENDATIONS . 3 4 DESCRIPTION OF PRACTICAL MARKET SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 3 How to select targets for Market Surveillance? 3 How to behave in Market Surveillance situations? . 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10 Action to improve the standards . 7 OTHER RELATED MATT

5、ERS 7 5.1 How to avoid potential implementation problems of ERC Recommendations/ Decisions already in their drafting phase? 7 5.2 How to selects samples for control measurements? 4 Measurement programme (pre-testing, accredited testing) . 4 What degree of non-compliance will justify further action?

6、. 5 Negotiating with the manufacturerlresponsible conformity assessment body . 5 Restrictions with regard to placing on the markevother legal action 6 Notification to the European Commission and informing authorities in other CEPT countries . 6 Databases containing useful information for Market Surv

7、eillance work 6 5 Problems in the availability of information on the implementation of the ERC DecisionslRecommendations 7 STD-CEPT ERC REPORT 78-ENGL 2000 232bqL4 00Lb57L 270 ERC REPORT 78 Page i MARKET SURVEILLANCE ASPECTS OF ENFORCEMENT FOR RADIO EQUIPMENT 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of this Repor

8、t For the preparation of guidance on Market Surveillance it is necessary to have a common idea about the subject and what has to be done in this respect. Although harmonisation is desirable, within the EU and the wider CEPT community, Market Surveillance activities are a national matter. The New App

9、roach directives foresee it to be carried out and there is also Chapter 8 in the Guide to the Implementation of Directives based on the New Approach and Global Approach dedicated to the principles of Market Surveillance. This ERC Report concentrates on the specific case of Radio Equipment covered by

10、 the R - compliance with the technical requirements and - compliance with regulatory requirements for marking, labeling and other documentation e.g. user information. After non-compliance has been confirmed by verification, such as measurements, follow-up action will need to be put in place to have

11、the discovered problems corrected. Inspection of radio equipment: Carrying out on-site measurements on radio stations and checking whether or not radio equipment complies with the generaVindividua1 licence andor permitted conditions. Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of

12、9 March 1999 on radio equipment and 1 telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity, OJ L 91,7.4.1999 STD-CEPT ERC REPORT 78-ENGL 2000 232b414 00Lb572 LO7 ERC REPORT 78 Page 2 1.3 It appears that in some countries it will be allowed to possess any radio equipme

13、nt but nevertheless licences (e.g. for radio frequency use) must be held to use some radio equipment. In other countries licences may be needed to both possess and use radio equipment. Differences of approach between legislation in the various countries and impact on the wording The R or which can o

14、nly transmit under the control of a network; or which use a frequency band which is allocated to the same radio inte$ace in every Member State in the following way: a) there is a common frequency allocation; and b) within this allocation, the allotment andor assignment of radio frequencies or radio

15、frequency channels follows a common plan or arrangement; and c) the equipment satisfies common parameters (e.g. frequency, power, duty cycle, bandwidth, etc.). ERC mpow 7s Page 6 Notification of radio equipment which uses frequency bands whose use is not hannonised throughout the Community should be

16、 made to relevant Member States, .e. Member States upon whose market it is intended to place the equipment but where the equipment is not complying with the national frequency use. - end of quotation - This was the majority view in TCAM but some delegations did not accept the definition of the relev

17、ant Member State on the two last lines. This may lead to different national implementation for the scope of notifications and is likely also to confuse the industry. Therefore the equipment data plate and documentation accompanying it must be used to identify the manufacturer and in relevant cases a

18、lso the involved Notified Body, which both can then be contacted for additional information. Negotiation with the manufacturer and the involved Conformity Assessment Body should take place before starting any formal legal action. In case there is reason to doubt the conformity of the product with th

19、e declared standards, information about the test results which the manufacturer has used as the technical basis for his declaration can be requested. This doubt can be based on initial pre-testing results and occurred cases of interference. If the legislation leaves room for negotiated voluntary act

20、ion by the manufacturer to correct the problem and the manufacturer is co-operative, legal action should be avoided because the results of legal action are often unpredictable in complicated technical matters. The possibilities to decide on the use of legal action are also dependent on the role the

21、Market Surveillance authority can have in the court session (a party or only a witness). 4.7 The results of an investigation may require decisions on actions for correcting the situation. A common understanding or agreement within CEPT that a certain defined degree of non-compliance with the R&TTE D

22、irective or national regulations should lead to the conclusion that specific action would be desirable. However if the case goes as far as to a court of justice, the results may be unpredictable as mentioned above. The set of restrictions available varies in different countries. Care should be taken

23、 that non-compliant products from the market of one country are not transported to another country. However in the case of radio transmitters it is possible that a product variant not compliant with the Radio Interface of one country is compliant with that of another country (see examples under the

24、second cases in chapter 4.1). Restrictions with regard to placing on the markeuother legal action 4.8 There is a legal obligation in the EU regulated area to notify the Commission (and other Member States) if restrictions for placing on the market are decided upon (required by art. 9.6 of the R&TTE

25、Directive), but this would also be useful in case of manufacturers voluntary action and within the wider CEPT area. A common understanding or agreement within CEPT on how and to whom information should be given would be desirable. All product specific information has to be treated as confidential an

26、d should be available only to Market Surveillance Authorities in other countries and the European Commission. Notification to the European Commission and informing authorities in other CEPT countries The manner of co-operation has not yet been established in the radio equipment and telecommunicatian

27、s terminai sector but a similar method as in the EMC and electrical safety sector can be foreseen. In the past the participation in these administrative co-operation groups has been restricted to EEA countries but it would be desirable to extend the participation at least in the Telecommunications s

28、ector to cover a wider CEPT membership including, at least, those non-EEA countries that will sooner or later implement the R&TTE Directive. 4.9 There are already a number of databases maintained by the ER0 which are useful for Market Surveillance activities. The most important of these is perhaps t

29、he one containing information on equipment types placed on the market on the basis of conformity assessment procedures in accordance with ERC/DEC(97) 10. There is also a database on national implementation of ERC Decisions and Recommendations. The database on national Enforcement Organisations and C

30、ontact Persons is useful for ad hoc contacts and has recently been up-dated. Databases containing useful information for Market Surveillance work In some CEPT countries the type approval authorities keep a database on national type approvals of radio and telecommunications terminal equipment. In Aus

31、tria, Estonia and Finland, at least, this information is publicly available through Internet mainly for consumers but it is used also in Market Surveillance fieldwork. , ERC REPORT 78 Page 7 These databases on type approvals will soon loose their value when the RBrTTED becomes implemented and simila

32、r databases cannot be created from information gathered through notifications by manufacturers on the basis of art. 6.4 of the RTTE Directive. This is because the manufacturer is only obliged to noti6 to the authorities of those countries where placing on the market is planned but where the equipmen

33、t which uses frequency bands whose use is not harmonised throughout the Community and does not comply with the national frequency usage. During the preparatory studies on the implementation of the R&TTE Directive AHG-A prepared a proposal called Project EINSTEIN that contained elements for the diffe

34、rent data exchange needs of the R&TTE Directive. The European Commission has launched a feasibility study to further investigate such data exchange needs. The results of this study are expected to be available during autumn 2000. 4.10 Some of the findings from Market Surveillance could reveal shortc

35、omings in standards that could lead to revision by the standardisation bodies. In this matter the MOU between the ERC and ETSI could be invoked. It is not however a very fast process and may require considerable evidence of occurred problems. Under the R&TTE Directive the essential requirements can

36、be fulfilled by applying the Harmonised Standards prepared based on a mandate from EC. Articles 5.2-3 and 9.4 of the Directive describe the procedure to initiate the process for amending a harmonised standard. Action to improve the standards 5 OTHER RELATED MATTERS 5.1 How to avoid potential impleme

37、ntation problems of ERC Recommendations/ Decisions already in their drafting phase? Sometimes the texts contain compromises that are ambiguous and lead to different interpretations (maybe sometimes this has been the purpose). The scope should be clear. Requirements should not be unrealistic from the

38、 implementation point of view. Some occurred cases of implementation and enforcement problems: 0 The transmitter power limit of 2.4 GHz RLANs is defined in terms of EIRP and it must be type approvddeclared by manufacturer with a specific antenna to comply with this limit. However the user can easily

39、 connect another antenna to achieve a longer range. It remains to be seen how the planned restrictions on the use of certain types of HIPERLAN equipment outdoors can be enforced. 5.2 Manufacturers have had problems understanding the difference between commitment and actual implementation when lookin

40、g at information on the ER0 web pages. This problem has now been partly solved by adding in each Decision a note that complete implementation information can be found in the Implementation area of the web pages. Also many CEPT Member Administrations forget to send implementation information to the E

41、RO. Therefore there is still not enough confidence in the accuracy and completeness of the comments regarding reservations on parts of Decisions/- Recommendations or selection of national options therein. Many CEFT countries seem to need a very long time to implement a Decisiofleconunendation. On th

42、e other hand old Recommendations like T/R O 1-04 for Short Range Devices is still the basis of national regulations in some countries even if that Recommendation has been replaced by ERC Recommendation 70-03. Problems in the availability of information on the implementation of the ERC DecisiondRecom

43、mendations Manufacturers and other CEPT countries seem to have problems knowing exactly when different countries have implemented a DecisionlRecommendation. Better procedures are needed to ensure that implementation information of DecisiondRecommendations is always correct as far as national comment

44、s/options are concerned. Not understanding this complex situation is a potential source of problems in the market. The great number of ERC Decisions is a result of trying to split the problem in small parts to achieve the widest possible implementation. STD-CEPT ERC REPORT 78-ENGL 2000 232b4L4 00Lb5

45、78 b25 D * ERC REPORT 78 Page 8 This system may be understandable for CEPT administrations but for an outsider (the industry and the users) it is difficult to understand. Maybe one could find a more illustrative ways of describing the restrictions or possibilities to the industry and the users, othe

46、r than just telling that X country has implemented ERCDEC Y. With implementation of the R&TTED the industry also needs reliable information about the restrictions to be able to inform the user according to art. 6.3 of the R&TTE Directive. Even after the implementation of the R&TTE Directive within t

47、he EEA countries and later in the candidate EU member countries the frequency allocation and licensing matters will continue to be based on CEFT/ERC Recommendations and Decisions but detailed information on National Radio Interfaces needs to be published. The format of detailed National Frequency Allocation Tables on the web pages of the national administrations has been proposed as a practical way of achieving this. However to do this by 8 April 2000 is becoming a critical factor. References: R&TTE Directive 99/05/EC ERC Recommendations 70-03 and T/R01-04