Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the "Commission Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility" (COM(2002) 759 final — 2002/0306 (COD))
Date: 2003-06-18
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: approximation of laws, electro-magnetic equipment, harmonisation of standards

16.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 220/13

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Commission Proposal for a
Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws of the
Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility’

(COM(2002) 759 final — 2002/0306 (COD))

(2003/C 220/03)

On 31 January 2003, the Council of the European Union decided to consult the European Economic and
Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-
mentioned proposal.

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 4 June 2003. The rapporteur was Mr Green.

At its 400th plenary session on 18 and 19 June 2003 (meeting of 18 June) the European Economic and
Social Committee unanimously adopted the following opinion.

1. Background to the proposal

2.2.

The proposal gives more detailed definitions of:

1.1.
The aim of the existing EMC Directive is to ensure the
free movement of the products referred to in it by guaranteeing
a homogeneous electromagnetic environment and ensuring
the proper functioning of the products concerned.

— essential requirements; and

— harmonised standards.

1.2.
Some time after its adoption, users began to experience
problems with the interpretation and application of the EMC
Directive 89/336/EEC. Although the Commission attempted
to resolve the difficulties by issuing explanatory guidelines,
many problems remained. Around 1995, therefore, the Com-
mission launched a major initiative to draw up a guide that
would tackle all major problems. Reflecting the growing
experience of industry, the Commission, Member States and
other stakeholders, a guide to the application of Directive 89/
336/EEC was published in 1997. That was a major step
forward. The weakness, however, is that a guide does not have
legal force. Nevertheless, the 1997 guide was, and still
is,
broadly supported by the parties concerned.

1.3. Meantime, the Council decided that the EMC Directive
should be one of the areas dealt with in the framework of the
SLIM initiative (Simpler Legislation for the Internal Market),
which attempts to simplify EU legislation by involving user
groups in the preparatory work. The Commission’s EMC SLIM
Working Group drew up the recommendations in document
COM(2002)759 final, drawing on the work of the SLIM panel.

2. The Commission proposal

The Commission is proposing the direct incorporation
2.1.
of parts of its 1997 guide to the EMC Directive into the new
draft directive.

2.3.
The text states that the directive covers fixed instal-
lations. That is not new since the Commission has already
stated that fixed telephone networks fall under the scope of
the existing directive.

2.4.
The scope of the directive is widened slightly to include
components and sub-assemblies. Similarly, the directive also
covers ready-made connecting devices intended for connection
to an apparatus by the end-user for the transmission of signals.

2.5.
A further new feature is that, in all cases, producers,
and others, can chose not to involve a notified body and are
free to furnish proof of conformity in any way, regardless of
whether harmonised standards are in place or not.

3. General comments on the Commission proposal

The parties concerned have, generally speaking, been
3.1.
quite happy with the existing directive, provided the 1997
guide to its application is properly applied. In practice, all
parties comply with the guide. Nevertheless, this new draft
directive is preferable, because it gives more legal certainty on
the various issues. Moreover, it is somewhat more adapted
to market needs and removes some existing unnecessary
requirements.

C 220/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.9.2003

3.2.

Scope of the proposal

3.2.1.
nitions and more clearly defined exclusions.

The scope is clarified by means of improved defi-

3.2.2.
in particular clarify the practical application of the directive.

The definitions of components and sub-assemblies

3.2.3.
The term ‘ready-made connecting devices’ is unclear
and is ambiguously translated in, for instance, the Danish,
Dutch and English language versions. The Commission should
put forward a more precise definition of the term. The question
is whether it is necessary at all to include these ‘ready-made
connecting devices’ within the scope of the directive.

3.3.

Fixed installations

3.3.1.
A more appropriate regulatory regime is applied to
fixed installations. Industry welcomes the inclusion under the
fixed installation regime of
large machines, high-voltage
equipment and energy distribution and telecommunication
networks.

3.3.2.
An example of the main problem with the existing
directive is the requirement to assess fixed installations before
they are placed on the market or put into service.
It is
technologically impossible to assess many installations. More-
over, installations may be changed from time to time or even
installations cause very few EMC
every day. Given that
problems for the surrounding area, it is unrealistic to assess
each and every fixed installation. Therefore, under the new
draft directive, installations only have to be constructed in
accordance with good engineering practice. If, on a very rare
occasion, EMC problems do perhaps come to light, the
authorities will have legal tools to resolve them adequately.
The cost of this arrangement is extremely low compared to
the cost of assessing all installations before they are put into
service.

3.3.3.
Administrative obligations are another issue. The
existing directive requires an EC declaration of conformity and
the affixation of the CE marking. Every time an installation is
changed, the EMC radiation is no longer the same as it was
originally. Thus, a new assessment has to be performed before
a new EC declaration of conformity can be drawn up. That
the existing directive
makes the practical application of
the 1997 guide provided a
impossible. For this reason,
pragmatic approach that
the parties
concerned. The solution provided in the guide is now included
into the new draft directive.

is supported by all

3.4.

Essential requirements

3.4.1.
The draft directive extends the essential requirements,
not least in relation to the EMC assessment, external devices

and information requirements. Because of the extra costs
involved, the inclusion of ‘ready-made connecting devices’ is
probably the most controversial change made in the draft
directive.

The added requirement to perform an electromag-
3.4.2.
netic compatibility assessment
is rather obvious, because
electromagnetic radiation and susceptibility have to be
measured before adequate information can be provided on
compliance with the directive. The information requirements
were added in order to enhance the traceability of
the
manufacturer or the authorised representative in the EU.

3.4.2.1.
It is unnecessary and costly to require information
from both the manufacturer and his authorised EU representa-
tive if the manufacturer is not established within the Com-
munity. The Commission proposal fails to provide adequate
reasons for this provision.

3.4.2.2.
(Essential
follows:

Annex I, point 4(b) of the proposed directive
requirements) should therefore be amended as

‘Each apparatus shall be accompanied by the name and
address of the manufacturer. If the manufacturer is not
established within the Community, each apparatus shall be
accompanied the name and address of his authorised
representative ...’

3.5. Conformity assessment

i.e.

Article 10(2) of

the existing directive requires
3.5.1.
involvement of a competent body when the applicable har-
monised standard is not (entirely) met. Such mandatory
involvement was necessary at the time the existing directive
was adopted in the 1980s because EMC-related engineering
practice and education were not then widespread. In the
intervening years, the EMC Directive gave a huge boost to
the sector,
industry and education. Nowadays, most
manufacturers have much more experience of EMC and there
are many possibilities for education. The competent bodies
report a decreasing amount of work under Article 10(2).
Moreover, because it is obligatory to involve a competent
body, many cases have, in the recent past, been referred by
manufacturers, who themselves are proficient enough. Such
manufacturers launched the procedure merely because it is
mandatory, but in fact it was unnecessary because their
knowledge of EMC is far beyond what was expected in the
early days when the existing directive was first adopted. Finally,
some large manufacturers have created their own in-house
competent body in order to avoid expensive third-party
involvement.

16.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 220/15

3.5.2.
However, it is still very useful to include the possi-
bility of involving an official expert for manufacturers who do
not feel secure. Therefore, the new draft provides for a notified
body, which can be involved by manufacturers at their own
discretion.

3.5.3.
The proposed directive gives manufacturers the
choice between drawing up the technical documentation
themselves or assigning the task to the notified body referred
to in Article 11. The proposed text is however unclear, and
the second paragraph of Article 7(2) should be recast as
follows:

‘In order to confirm the compliance of the apparatus with
the relevant essential requirements set out in Annex I, the
manufacturer may choose either to draw up his own report
or to submit a report from the notified body referred to in
Article 11. The manufacturer may determine the subject
and depth of the assessment to be carried out.’

turers of non-compliant products. It is hoped that the new
information requirements will resolve these problems prop-
erly.

3.6.2.
The Commission should ensure that the provisions
of the proposed directive accord with the recently adopted
Directive on waste electrical and electronic equipment (the so-
called WEEE Directive).

4. Conclusion

4.1.
The European Economic and Social Committee
endorses the Commission proposal, which gives more legal
is better
certainty on the issues involved. The proposal
adapted to market needs and removes existing unnecessary
requirements.

3.6. Market surveillance

3.6.1.
Over the past few years, market-surveillance auth-
orities have reported increasing difficulty in finding manufac-

The term ‘ready-made connecting devices’ is unclear
4.2.
and, in certain cases, the marking requirements are needlessly
comprehensive and costly.

Brussels, 18 June 2003.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH