Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

**Brussels, 27.03.1996**
**COM(96) 114** **final**

**PROGRESS REPORT 1995**

**ON** **THE APPROXIMATION** **OF** **THE LAWS** **OF** **THE MEMBER STATES**

**CONCERNING TELECOMMUNICATIONS TERMINAL EQUIPMENT,**

**INCLUDING THE MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF THEIR CONFORMITY**

**SUPPLEMENTED IN RESPECT OF SATELLITE EARTH STATION**

**EQUIPMENT**

**(Presented** **by** **the Commission)**

**TABLE OF CONTENTS**

**0.** **EXECUTIVE SUMMARY** **3**

**1.** **INTRODUCTION** **„5**

**1.1** **Outline** **of** **the Report Structure** **6**

**2.** **THE MECHANISM OF THE DIRECTIVES** **91/263/EEC** **AND** **93/97/EEC Tr** **7**

**2.1.** **The adoption** **of** **CTRs......** **1.8**

**2.2 Progress Made to Date** **9**

**2.3** **New Candidate CTRs** **17**

**2.4** **Market Coverage** **17**

**2.5** **Conformity Assessment Procedures** **18**

**2.6** **Specifics for the Satellite Earth Station Directive,** **93/97/EEC** **19**

**2.7** **Mutual Recognition Arrangements (MRAs)** **20**

**2.8** **Relations with EFTA Countries** **21**

**3.** **PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED DURING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF**

**THE DIRECTIVE** **23**

**3.1** **Experience** **on** **the Scope** **of** **Directive** **91/263/EEC** **23**

**3.2** **The coverage of radio** **equipment....** **25**

**3.3** **Marking Regime** **....:.:** **.26**

**3.4** **The slowness of the standardisation process.....** **..........27**

**3.5** **Experiences in the Elaboration of TBRs** **'..'.29**

**3.6** **Harmonised standards** **and.CTRs..** **:** **30**

**3.7** **Competition amongst Designated Laboratories** **31**

**3.8** **Responsiveness of** **Processes** **Supporting the** **Directives** **31**

**3.9** **Assessment of Conformity:.** **32**

**4.** **PERSPECTIVES** **FOR** **THE** **FUTURE.......** **.....33**

**4.1** **Essential Requirements** **33**

**1**

**4.2** **Conformity assessment procedures: The time for simplification** **34**

**4.3** **Modifications of the scope of the Directive** **35**

**4.4** **The Rationale for a Radio Equipment Directive** **35**

**4.5** **Relations with** **ETSI** **.'** **35**

**4.6** **Liberalisation of Infrastructure** **36**

**5.** **CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS** **38**

**RECOMMENDATIONS** **38**

**ANNEX 1** **PROCESS** **FOR** **THE ADOPTION** **OF** **CTRS** **41**

**ANNEX 2 NUMBERS OF PEOPLE WITH SPECIAL NEEDS IN EUROPE** **43**

**ANNEX 3** **LIST** **OF NOTIFIED** **BODIES............!.** **44**

**ANNEX 4 OFFICIAL JOURNAL REFERENCES TO ADOPTED CTRS** **48**

**\** **\**

**0.** **EXECUTIVE** **SUMMARY**

**This is the first Progress Report which has been prepared for submission to the**
**Council and the European Parliament in accordance with Article 15 of the**
**Council** **Directive 91/263/EEC of 29 April 1991 on the approximation of the**
**laws of the Member States concerning telecommunications terminal equipment,**
**including the mutual recognition of their conformity and in accordance with**
**Article** **17.1 of the Council Directive 93/97/EEC of 29 October 1993**

**supplementing Directive** **91/263/EEC** **in order to include satellite earth station**
**equipment.**

**These Directives aim to provide the regulatory** **framework** **appropriate to a single**
**market for all types of telecommunications terminal equipment ranging from**
**simple telephones to the most sophisticated multimedia terminals required by the**
**information society. This single market requires free circulation of these terminals**
**throughout the** **union,** **ability to connect to any network and a single, streamlined**
**Approval procedure. The Directives specify a harmonised system for**
**conformance testing and provide a** **framework** **for the application of harmonised**
**European standards as Common Technical Regulations(CTRs) which specify the**
**requirements that are essential to ensure compatibility between terminals and**
**networks. This harmonisation of terminal equipment must be achieved within the**
**context of telecommunications networks** **which,** **themselves, are far from**
**harmonised.**

**The report highlights the specific nature of these two New Approach Directives**
**which implement a dual approach utilising reference to harmonised standards for**
**safety** **and electromagnetic** **compatibility** **requirements** **and** **mandatory**
**requirements for certain specific telecommunications requirements.**

**These Directives combine in a simplified regime the placing on the internal**
**market of telecommunications terminal equipment and satellite earth stations and**
**the right of** **connection/usage** **of such goods without further administrative**
**procedures. The key objective is to have a one-stop regime in this area.**

**So far 9 Common Technical Requirements (CTRs), which specify the mandatory**
**essential requirements, have been adopted covering the key areas of GSM,**
**DECT, ERMES, EURO ISDN and ONP leased lines. A further batch of** **29**
**CTRs, covering Data Networks, Analogue PSTN, TFTS, etc., are in the process**
**of being** **adopted.** **While these CTRs provide for the harmonisation of some**
**significant markets such as GSM handsets, large market segments such as**
**PABXs, key telephone systems and simple telephones are yet to be significantly**
**addressed.**

**The report identifies the problems encountered in particular regarding the long**
**delays** **in the preparation of the technical specifications and test suites required**
**for type approvals.**

**Industry, in particular, has expressed the view that the current regime is a too**
**heavy and bureaucratic instrument to harmonise the** **.telecommunications**
**equipment market.**

**Based on experience gained so far and an analysis of** **the** **scope of** **the** **Directives,**
**the following actions are seen to be necessary :**

**i.** **Relaxation of** **the** **procedures applied by the notified bodies for conformity**
**assessment,**
**ii.** **Extension of the scope of** **the** **Directives to cover all** **•** **types of**
**telecommunication equipment using the radio** **frequency** **spectrum,**
**iii.** **Fundamental review of the regulatory framework and, in particular of the**
**two Directives, in order to adapt to the new dynamics of** **the** **market place**
**and the future needs of the European Information** **Society,**
**iv.** **Improvement to guidance** **of** **a regulatory nature given to** **ETSI,**
**v.** **,** **Improvement to ETSI TC and STC working practices in the area of**

**mandated work of a regulatory nature,**
**vi.** **Reduction of the period between the approval of a proposed measure by**
**ACTE and the publication of the CTR in the Official Journal.**

**These recommendations have been included in Section 5 of the Report.**

**IrrrRobucnoN**

**One of the objectives set out by the Green Paper for the development of a**
**Common Market for telecommunications services and products in Europe (1987)**
**was the liberalisation of terminal equipment. Up to that day, the supply of**
**terminal equipment in most Member States was monopolised by the state owned**
**telecom operator who argued that this was justified by the need for a** **co-**
**ordinated function between the network and the equipment.**

**Following the issuing of the Green Paper and the major recent developments in**
**communications technology the liberalisation of the terminal equipment market**
**became feasible. The need for a co-ordinated function between the network and**

**the equipment could be fully satisfied through type approval procedures which**
**would** **check compliance of the terminal with technical specifications.**

**Council Directive** **86/361/EEC** **on the initial stage of the mutual recognition of**
**type approval for telecommunications terminal equipment constituted a first step**
**towards the establishment of a single market in this sector. Under the regime laid**
**down by this Directive, a manufacturer or distributor could have their product**
**tested against the relevant NET (Norme Européenne de** **Télécommunication)** **at**
**any laboratory recognised by the national body and notified to the Commission.**
**A certificate of Conformity and a Test Report were provided by the laboratory**
**which could be submitted to other national bodies in place of further testing in**
**each country. This arrangement is referred to as mutual recognition of test**
**results. To obtain type approval applications had nevertheless to be submitted to**
**authorities in each country. In this** **way,** **Council Directive 86/361/EEC**
**incorporated** **the principle of the** **"mutual** **recognition of the results of tests of**
**conformity with common conformity specifications" and contributed** **to** **the**
**establishment of a common market in this sector.**

**This First Phase Directive was repealed in November** **1992** **with the entering into**
**force of the Telecommunications Terminal Directive 91/263/EEC. This Directive**

**established a one stop type approval procedure including the right of connection**
**so that equipment** **approved in** **one Member State can be immediately placed on**
**the market and** **put** **into service in all other** **Member** **States without the need for**
**additional administrative procedures. Furthermore, the Directive lays down a**
**number of** **definitions** **of the essential requirements necessary to** **provide**
**safeguards due to the technical characteristics of** **the** **public networks. With the**
**adoption of Directive** **93/97/EEC** **the scope was further enhanced to cover**
**satellite** **earth stations.**

**These Directives aimed** **to** **make the establishment of internal market in** **the**

**telecommunications terminal equipment sector a reality. Furthermore, the**
**Directives provided for the possibility for the Community to negotiate Mutual**
**Recognition Agreements with third countries, and thereby extending the one stop**
**approval and connection system beyond the physical boundaries of the** **EEA** **This**
**would give EU manufacturers the opportunity to reap the benefits of economies**
**of** **scale and compete on an** _**equal**_ _**basis**_ **in the world markets.**

**The principal objective of** **the** **progress report is to give a first assessment of the**
**regime established by the two Directives on the basis of the experience gained**
**during the first year of implementation. This includes the progress made on**
**drawing up the relevant harmonised standards and transforming these into**
**technical regulations as well as the problems encountered by the relevant**
**authorities within the Member States during the course of implementation of the**
**Directives.**

**1.1** **Outline of the Report Structure**

**The report is produced in accordance with Article** **15** **of Council Directive**
**91/263/EEC and Article 17.1 of Directive 93/97/EEC. The report is structured**
**as follows:**

**Chapter** **2:** **outlines the principles and the conformity assessment procedures**
**applied and includes the progress achieved.**

**Chapter** **3:** **analyses the functioning of the Directive and puts forward an**
**assessment of the problems encountered.** _**•**_

**Chapter** **4:** **makes a number of proposals regarding the scope of the Directives,**
**possible relaxation of procedures and a call for preparation of a**
**Radio Equipment Directive.**

**Chapter 5:** **contains the conclusions and four recommendations.**

**ANNEX** **1.** **Process for the adoption of CTRs**
**ANNEX 2. Numbers of People with Special Needs in Europe**
**ANNEX 3. List of Notified Bodies**

**ANNEX 4 Official Journal references to Adopted CTRs**

**••VÎT**

_**2.**_ **THE MECHANISM OF THE** **DIRECTIVES** **91/263/EEC AND 93/97/EEC**

**The technical divergence between the** **various** **telecom networks in the** **EU** **meant**
**that the simple mutual recognition of the national type approval of terminal**
**equipment was not possible. The** **"free** **circulation of terminal equipment" could**
**only be achieved by a common type approval regime based on harmonised**
**standards and/or specifications.** **To this end, the Directive 91/263/EEC was**

**issued.**

**The Directive follows the model of the New Approach** **[1]** **Directives. It lays down**
**a list of essential** **requirements** **and it entrusts to standardisation bodies the task**
**of drawing up the technical specifications under mandates issued by the**
**Commission** **These technical specifications which are elaborated, usually by**
**ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute), are in the form of**
**Technical** **Basis** **for** **Regulations** **(TBRs).** **Alternatively,** **European**
**Telecommunications** **Standards (ETS), mandated to become** **harmonised**
**standards under Directives 91/263/EEC and 93/97/EEC can be used to specify**
**the essential requirements. At the same time, it requires national authorities to**
**recognise that products manufactured in conformity with harmonised standards**
**are presumed to comply with the** **"essential** **requirements"** **established by the**
**Directive. Further to a conformity assessment procedure, products which comply**
**with the requirements of the Directive can carry the CE marking and circulate**
**freely** **in the EU.**

**However the provisions of Directive** **91/263/EEC** **diverge in some respects from**
**the model of the New Approach. According to Article 6 of the Directive,**
**harmonised standards which implement the essential requirements** **[2]** **(c), (d), (e),**

**1** **The fundamental principles of** **this** **New Approach were set out in Council Resolution 85/C 136/01** **of**
**the 7th May 1985** **(OJ** **Reference** **C** **136** **of** **4th June 1985) and they can be summarised as follows:**

**legislative harmonisation is limited to the adoption of the essential safety requirements (or other**
**requirements in the general interest).**

**the task of drawing up the technical specifications is entrusted to organisation competent in the**
**standardisation** **area.**

**at the same time national authorities** **are** **obliged to recognise that products** **manufactured** **in**
**conformity with harmonised standards are presumed to comply with the "essential requirements"**
**established** **by** **the Directive.**

**2** **Article 4 of Directive** **91/263** **states that** **"Terminal** **equipment shall satisfy the following essential**
**requirements:** **.** ***** **'** **'** **•**

**a) user safety, in so** **far as** **this requirement is not** **covered by** **Directive** **73/23/EEC;**

**b) safety of** **employees** **of** **public** **telecommunications network** **operators,** **in so far as this requirement is**
**not covered by Directive 73/23/EEC;**

**c) electromagnetic compatibility requirements in so far** **as** **they** **are** **specific to terminal** **equipment;**

**d) protection** **of** **the public telecommunications network from harm;**

**7 '**

**(f),** **and (g) shall be transformed into Common Technical Regulations (CTRs),**
**compliance with which shall be mandatory. This divergence is due to the fact that**
**it is not in general possible to comply with the interworking requirements for**
**access** **and/or** **for end-to-end communications other than by the application of**
**unique technical solutions.**

**2.1.** **The adoption of CTRs**

**In order for a CTR to be adopted the Commission submits a scope statement for**
**the development of a CTR for an identified type of terminal equipment to the**
**Approvals Committee for Terminal Equipment (ACTE). This scope statement**

**will** **have** **been** **elaborated** **with** **additional** **consultation** **with** **the**

**Telecommunications Regulations Application Committee (TRAC). The opinion**
**of ACTE regarding this draft scope statement is asked for according to the rules**
**described in Article** **148** **(2) of the Treaty.**

**The** **Commission,** **formally, issues a mandate to the recognised standardisation**

**bodies** **ETSI/CEN/CENELEC** **and in most cases it will be ETSI which is**

**entrusted to develop the corresponding harmonised standard, the so called**
**Technical Basis for Regulation (TBR).** **In practice, mandates may be given**
**before the consultation process on the scope statement has been completed, in**
**order to speed-up the process. When complete, the TBR is delivered to the**
**Commission. TRAC will advice the Commission on the technical suitability of**
**the** **TBR.** **The Commission then prepares a draft measure for a CTR** **comprising**
**of regulatory aspects and the TBR. In this process additional consultations are**
**made.** **The opinion of ACTE is then sought.** **If the opinion of ACTE is**
**favourable, the Commission renders the TBR mandatory by transforming it into**
**the CTR to be published in the Official Journal** **(OJ).** **The CTR then becomes** **EU**
**law. If the opinion of ACTE is not favourable, or if no opinion is delivered, the**

**e) effective use of the radio frequency** **spectrum,** **where appropriate;**

**f)** **interworking of terminal equipment with the public telecommunications network equipment for the**
**purpose of** **establishing,** **modifying, charging** **for,** **holding** **and** **clearing real** **or virtual** **connection;**

**g) interworking of terminal equipment via the** **public** **telecommunication network, in justified cases.**

**The cases where terminal equipment supports:**

**(i) reserved service according to Community law,**

**(ii) a service which the Council has decided that there should** **be** **Community-wide availability,**

**are considered** **as** **justified cases and the requirements concerned are determined in accordance with**
**the procedure provided for in Article** **14** **(reference to ACTE).**

**In** **addition,** **after consultation of** **representatives** **of the bodies referred to in Article 13 (3) and taking due**
**account of these consultations, the Commission may propose that this essential requirement is recognized**
**as being justified for other terminal equipment in accordance with the procedure provided for in**
**Article 14.**

**8**

**, .,,** **;** **w .** **r > 7** **» .**

**Commission shall submit to the Council a proposal relating to the measure to be**
**taken** **[3]** **.**

**On no occasion, since the establishment of the committee, has it been necessary**
**to refer a decision to the Council** **[ 4]** **.**

**The overall process including consultations is described in more detail in**

**Annex 1.**

**2.2 Progress Made to Date**

**Adopted CTRs**

**This section describes the status of all CTRs that have been adopted by the**

**Commission on the advice of ACTE.** **The current status of all CTRs and**

**proposed CTRs is summarised in Table** **1.**

_**Pan-European Cellular Digital Mobile Communications**_

**The TBRs for GSM Phase 1** **[ 5]** **Access** **and Telephony Application Requirements**
**were adopted by the Commission on the advice given by ACTE in September**
**1993.** **These were published in the Official Journal** **[6]** **and came into force on 1**
**January 1994. This ended the interim type approval regime and type approval**
**against CTRs 5 and 9 can now be achieved at a number of Notified Bodies. The**
**testing and subsequent approval allows GSM equipment to be placed on the**
**market and put into service in any Member State or EFTA country.**

_**Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) Access and Telephony**_
_**-CTR3.4&8**_

**As** **required** **in** **the** **telecommunications** **terminal** **equipment** **Directive**
**(91/263/EEC),** **CTRs** **3,4** **and 8 are currently being drafted to replace NETs 3, 5,**
**and 33 respectively. NET 3, 5 and 33 were European standards for ISDN Basic**

**3** **Article 14.4 of Directive 91/263/EEC**

**Since the inaugural meeting in July 1991, in total 27 meetings have been held:**
**September 1991, October** **1991,** **December 1991, January 1992, February 1992, April 1992, May**
**1992,** **June 1992, September 1992, October 1992, November 1992, December 1992, January 1993,**
**March 1993, April 1993, May 1993, June 1993, September 1993, October 1993, December 1993,**
**February** **1994,** **April** **1994,** **May 1994, June 1994, September** **1994,** **and** **November 1994.**

_**1**_ **Phase** **1** **GSM covers full** **type** **approval** **to** **the original specification** **whereas Phase** **2 GSM covers new**

**features such as 12.5kHz voice codecs** **and** **enhanced supplementary services.**

**6** **Commission Decision** **94/11/EEC,** **OJ No.** **L8,** **12.1.94, p. 20 and Commission Decision 94/12/EEC,**
**OJN0.L8,** **12.1.94,** **p.** **23.**

***** _**X**_

**Access, Primary Rate** **[7]** **Access and 3.1 kHz Telephony Requirements. These**
**NETs have been published by ETSI in the form of ETSs and have been referred**
**to in the Official Journal in accordance with the provisions laid down in the First**
**Phase Terminal Equipment Directive (86/361/EEC).**

**It became clear to the Commission** **Services** **that the forecast dates for**

**development of the CTR 3 and CTR 4 were slipping** **significantly.** **Despite**
**additional funding to ETSI little improvements in dates was envisaged. The**
**following approach was therefore adopted due to the urgent need to have EURO**
**ISDN placed on the market and thereby ensuring that EURO ISDN would take**
**off. The approach was to reassess NET3 and NET5, to reduce the requirements**
**to the exact match with the essential requirements of Council Directive**
**91/263/EEC** **and to produce cross references to the test suites which had been**
**recently developed. The objective of the cross reference lists is to establish a**
**presumption of conformity with the appropriate essential requirements. The**
**Commission was therefore capable of presenting draft measures to ACTE on**
**EURO ISDN basic access and primary rate access. A favourable opinion was**
**reached in April** **1994.** **The two Commission Decisions, commonly referred to as**
**the bridging measures, were published in the Official Journal in December 1994.**
**It should be noted that France and Germany have additional requirements beyond**
**the bridging measures. A simplified administrative procedure, including mutual**
**recognition provisions has been agreed to accommodate such** **"delta** **[H ]**

**requirements.**

**A draft measure relating to ISDN telephony has been presented to ACTE and a**
**favourable opinion was obtained in September 1994.**

_**Digital European Cordless Telephony (DECT), CTRs**_ _**6,10**_ _**& 11**_

**The draft measures for DECT Access Requirements and DECT Telephony**
**Application Requirements were presented to ACTE in December 1993.** **A**
**positive opinion was given and these two CTRs were published in the Official**
**Journal in July** **1994.**

**The DECT Public Access Profile was ready for submission to ACTE in the final**
**form of a draft measure in September 1994. The ACTE opinion was positive.**

**At the June ACTE meeting it was agreed to extend the scope of CTR 6 and 10**
**to include DECT repeaters.**

_**Public Land-Based European Radio**_ _**Message**_ _**System (ERMES), CTR 7**_

**The ERMES TBRs delivered by ETSI have been ready for some time. However**
**from a regulatory point of view, the essential requirements to be tested were felt**
**to go beyond what was required for a receive-only terminal** **type.** **Following**
**consultation with the ACTE Head of Delegations, the Commission was capable**

**ISDN** **Basic** **access provides two** **64kb/s** **communication channels and one** **16kb/s** **control channel.**
**Primary rate access provides thirty 64kb/s** **communication channels** **and one 64kb/s** **control channel.**

**10**

of proposing a draft measure covering ERMES which was adopted in August
1995.

_**ONP leased lines 2048**_ _**Kbit/s**_ _**unstructured and 64**_ _**Kbit/s,**_ _**CTRs 12 and 14**_

The draft measure for ONP leased liens 2048 Kbit/sec received a favourable

opinion by ACTE in December 1993. The corresponding CTR, i.e. CTR 12 was
published in July 1994. The draft measure for ONP leased lines 64 Kbit/sec
received a favourable opinion from ACTE in April 1994 and was adopted in
December 1994.

Proposed **CTRs**

In addition, twelve draft CTRs are under preparation. These draft CTRs for
which scope statements ACTE has given a favourable opinion and mandates
given to ETSI are as follows:

**i**
_**Pan-European Cellular Digital Mobile Communications**_

In order to expedite type approvals for GSM Phase 2 terminals, the Commission
Services have already prepared draft Measures for CTRs 19 and 20 and have
consulted ACTE thereon. As soon as the relevant harmonised standards, TBRs
19 and 20, are available the formal opinion will be requested from ACTE.

_**X.**_ _**21 Network Access, CTR 1**_

The technical basis for regulation completed ETSI vote in July 1995. ACTE
expressed a favourable opinion on the draft measure in September 1995. It has
been agreed that only layer 1 should be included in the CTR. Layers 2 and 3 are
considered to be harmonised standards.

_**X.2S**_ _**Network Access,**_ _**CTR**_ _**2**_

As in the case of X.21 above, it has been agreed that only layer 1 should be
included in the CTR. Layers 2 and 3 are considered to be harmonised standards.
The public enquiry phase has been passed. The draft Measure is therefore to be
presented to ACTE during 1995.

_**EURO ISDN Basic Access and Primary Rate Access, CTR 3&4**_

As mentioned earlier, these CTRs will replace the current CTR 3 and CTR 4
(bridging measures). Expected date of coming into force is 1996 before the
expiry of the bridging measures (November 1996). A scope statement has been
agreed for Packet Mode Bearer Service access for both primary and basic rate.

_**ONP**_ _**2**_ _**Mbit/sec**_ _**structured leased**_ _**lines,**_ _**CTR**_ _**13**_

**The** technical basis for regulation is currently in thé Public Enquiry phase and the
ETSI vote result is expected before the end of 1995. The draft measure will be
very close to the text of already adopted ONP CTRs.

11

**-•*%** _**[^Xh ]**_

_**PSTN non-voice attachments, CTR 21**_

**A CTR for non-voice PSTN Attachments is intended to regulate the essential**
**requirements** **for** **non-speech** **analogue** **attachments** **to** **the** **public**
**telecommunications network. This would include, in particular, modems.** **This,** **is**
**an important problem for the European telecommunications terminal industry. At**
**present there** **axe** **a number of national approval regimes in place to test modems**
**and other non-voice PSTN attachments in each of the Member States**
**individually. This is a lengthy and expensive process for manufacturers and**
**distributors.** **'**

**However modems from markets other than the European market are being**
**connected to all analogue networks currently existing in the Member States.**
**Many of these modems are US sourced. This has created a** **'grey** **[1]** **market in these**
**non-voice attachments which can be connected to the network without being**
**approved for marketing or connection in the Member States.**

**A draft scope statement has been elaborated, on which ACTE has delivered a**
**favourable opinion and a mandate has been given to ETSI. The standardisation**
**work is in progress and the draft TBR should complete Public Enquiry by**
**November** **1995.**

_**Terrestrial Flight Telephone Systems (TFTS)**_

_**A**_ **CTR on for TFTS would harmonise airborne terminal equipment capable of**
**allowing** **passengers** **in** **commercial** **aircraft** **access** **to** **the** **public**
**telecommunications networks. The European Radiocommunications Committee**
**(ERC) has allocated the 1670-1675 MHz and** **1800-1805** **MHz bands for this**
**service. Additional approval or certification procedures would probably be**
**needed to supplement the proposed CTR to ensure compliance of** **the** **equipment**
**with the general safety aspects of the aircraft. These would be under the**
**jurisdiction of the Civil Aviation Authorities.**

**The scope statement for TFTS has been elaborated. A mandate has been placed**
**with ETSI.** **Standardisation** **work is in progress and the draft TBR is expected to**
**go for Public Enquiry by February 1996.**

_**ONP Analogue Leased Lines 2 and 4**_ _**wires,**_ _**CTRs 15 & 17**_

**These two ONP leased line CTRs both have-scope statements, mandates have**
**been placed with ETSI, the vote result is expected in December 1995.**

_**DECT Generic Access Profile, CTR 22**_

**To further enhance the connectivity of** **DECT** **to different networks, the current**
**Public Access Profile needs to be broadened. Therefore a scope statement has**
**been elaborated defining the requirements for a Generic Access Profile.** **A**
**mandate has been given to ETSI, standardisation work is in progress and the**
**completion of the ETSI voting procedure is expected in March** **1996.**

**12**

**• «TS-YT** **v-f'.-v** _**"^p***_ **—** _**'f <**_ **':•*;-• !•>** **.*>;.•"».••** **—» —|-••**

**.•••V** **[:]** **--''-** ***:: ::?*;'\.r *** **•** _**'••**_ **«'..'.•'**

_**Trans-European Trunked Radio (TETRA)**_

**This is a technology for Private Mobile Radio (PMR) communications. It allows**
**speech and data communication within a closed user group and could be used to**
**connect to the public telecommunications network.**

**In particular it can form the basis of a trans-European network including**
**international** **roaming** **agreements between the national** **public** **safety**
**organisations. The police forces are, for example, considering basing their**
**communications systems on the principles laid down in the relevant TETRA**
**standards**

**Problems have also been encountered in the harmonisation of the frequency**
**bands to be used in this system. This is because the bands most suitable for**
**TETRA are currently reserved for military and police applications in the EU**
**Member States. Discussions are being carried out with the relevant authorities to**
**attempt to free these bands for civilian applications.**

**A scope statement has been agreed which asks ETSI to elaborate the**
**requirements for emergency services use of** **TETRA,** **taking into account the**
**issues identified above and** **without,** **prejudice to the applicability of Directive**
**91/263/EEC** **for this class of equipment.**

_**Digital Cellular System (DCS 1800)**_

**The Digital Cellular System is essentially a modification to the GSM specification**
**to support operation in the** **1800** **MHz band. The lower power used and the use**
**of** **frequencies** **in the higher band imply small coverage but support higher traffic**
**densities. ETSI has already developed standards for DCS 1800 systems and**
**terminals. DCS 1800 systems are also commonly referred to as the Personal**
**Communications Network (PCN).**

**Scope statements for DCS 1800 Access and DCS** **1800** **Telephony have been**
**agreed. Problems have been encountered in the harmonisation of the frequency**
**bands to be used by DCS** **1800** **due to the current usage of the allocated bands by**
**non-public services. Two draft measures are currently under preparation** **which**
**duly take this issue into** **account.**

_**DECT/GSMAccess**_

**At the June ACTE meeting a scope statement was agreed for equipment that**
**uses DECT** **frequencies** **and protocols for access to the GSM network.**

_**Satellite Earth Stations**_

**Scope statements were agreed at the June ACTE meeting for the following**
**classes of satellite earth stations :-**

**L-Band** **low data rate land mobile satellite earth stations.**

**Ku-Band TVRO satellite earth stations.**

**Ku-Band** **VSAT** **satellite** **earth** **stations.**

**13**

Ku-Band land mobile satellite earth stations.

Ku-Band satellite news gathering transportable earth stations.

_**PSTN**_ _**Voice Access**_ _**and**_ _**Analogue**_ _**Handset Telephony**_

The market for analogue PSTN terminal equipment is still the major portion of
the total telecommunications terminal equipment sales. Despite the rapid
introduction of newer technologies, this situation is likely to remain unchanged
for several years. The domestic user market for analogue equipment continues to
expand with the use of second and third fixed phones or with cordless
technologies. The business market also continues to expand. In addition the life
span of analogue equipment has reduced dramatically with the development of
new features necessitating new models. All these factors imply a continuing
requirement for analogue terminal approvals.

In addition to the immediate market needs, the liberalisation of voice telephony
service and the liberalisation of telecommunications infrastructure are foreseen

for 1998 onwards. The regulatory framework for the post 1998 environment is
currently being developed, but it is already clear that the concept of Universal
Service is crucially important and that the definition of Universal Service will
include, as a minimum, a Universal Voice Telephony Service. At the same time
as encouraging competition for services and for infrastructure, we must carefully
safeguard the harmonisation objectives in the terminal equipment market.

Scope statements for PSTN Voice Access and Analogue Handset Telephony
were given a favourable opinion at the September ACTE meeting. ETSI have not
yet given estimates for the completion dates.

For the purpose of giving an overview of the CTRs adopted or under
development, please refer to Table 1.

The relevant Official Journal references are given in Annex 4

14

**.*•••"*"'>*«'•?**

##### **>>#-£**

**TABLE 1: STATUS** **OF** **CTRS ADOPTED OR UNDER DEVELOPMENT**

CTR

Number

CTR1

CTR 2

CTR 3

CTR 4

CTR 5

CTR 6

CTR 7

CTR 8

CTR 9

CTR 10

CTR 11

CTR 12

CTR 13

CTR 14

CTR 15

CTR 17

CTR 19

CTR 20

CTR 21

CTR 22

CTR 23

NET

Equivalent
(if applicable)

**NET1**

**NET** **2 .**

**NET** **3**

**NET** **5**

**- NET** **10**

**-**

**-**

**NET** **33**

**-**

**-**

**-.**

**-**

**-**

**-** **-**

**-**

**-**

**-**

. v     -     - ' • ' • "

**-**

**-**

Area of Harmonisation

**X.21** **Network Access**

**X.25 Network Access**

**ISDN Basic Access (Bridging Measure)**

**ISDN Primary Rate Access (Bridging** **Measure)**

**GSM (Phase 1) Access Requirements**

**DECT Access Requirements**

**ERMES Receive Only Access**

**Digital Telephony over ISDN**

**GSM (Phase 1) Telephony Attachment**
**Requirements**

**DECT Telephony Terminal Requirements**

**DECT Public Access Profile (PAP)**

**ONP Leased Lines: 2048** **Kbit/s** **Unstructured**

**ONP Leased Lines: 2048** **Kbit/s** **Structured**

**ONP Leased** **Lines:** **64 Kbit/s**

**ONP** **Leased** **Lines:** **Ordinary and special**
**quality voice - 2** **wire**

**ONP Leased** **Lines:** **Ordinary and** **special**
**quality voice - 4 wire**

**GSM (Phase 2) Access Requirements**

**GSM (Phase 2) Telephony Attachment**
**Requirements**

**Analogue PSTN** **Non-Voice** **Access**

**DECT Generic Access Profile**

**TFTS**

**15**

Adoption Date of
CTR measures

**expected 12/95**

**expected 08/96**

**"adopted 20/12/94**

**adopted 20/12/94**

**adopted 21/01/94- .**

**adopted 29/07/94**

**adopted** **2/8/95**

**expected** **11/95**

**adopted 12/01/94**

**adopted 29/07/94**

**expected** **11/95**

**adopted 29/07/94-**

**expected 03/96**

**adopted 29/12/94**

**expected 04/96**

**expected 04/96**

**expected 06/96**

**expected 06/96**

**expected 8/96**

**expected 07/96**

**expected 03/97**

**••'AT**
_**.).-**_ **—-**

Adoption Date of
CTR measures

**expected 09/96**

**expected 09/96**

**expected 10/97**

**expected 10/97** **'**

**expected 10/97**

**expected** **10/97** **-**

**expected** **10/97**

**expected 3/98**

**expected 10/97**

CTR

Number

CTR 24

CTR 25

CTR 26

CTR 27

CTR 28

CTR 29

CTR 30

CTR 35

CTR 36

NET

Equivalent
(if applicable)

**-**

**-**

**-**

**-**

**-**

**-**

**-**

**-**

**-**

Area of Harmonisation

**Leased lines** **D34U/D34S**

**Leased lines D140U/S**

**L-band** **low data rate mobile earth stations**

**Ku-band earth stations**

**Ku-band VSATs**

**Ku-band TVROs**

**Ku-band SNG**

**TETRA** **"Emergency** **access** **[H ]**

**DECT/GSM Radio**

**16**

**•:•"-** **-'«••«^p'rv^'^T-**

**V** **T.-.v„-**

**2.3** **New Candidate CTRs**

**ACTE is considering the treatment of the following classes of terminal but is yet**
**to take a position :**

_**Personal Satellite Communications Network (PSCN)**_

**A CTR for PSCN would cover terminal equipment capable of being** **connected** **to**
**the public telecommunications network via low earth orbit satellites. This is**
**considered to be a large market for future mobile telephony and falls within the**
**scope of the Satellite Earth Station Equipment Directive and thus within the**
**CTR regime.**

**ETSI have been given a mandate. This standardisation mandate** **(M/057)** **calls for**
**harmonised standards to be adopted by end** **1995.**

_**Terminals for People with Special Needs**_

**There is a growing awareness, recognised by regulators, that elderly** **arid** **disabled**
**people have the right to expect the same standard of service and access as every**
**other member of the public. The numbers of people involved is indicated in**
**Annex 2.**

**The Commission has consequently tabled a number of contributions at the most**
**recent ACTE meetings and it has been decided to make an in-depth analysis on**
**the needs of** **this** **group and the extent to which these needs can be met within**
**current legislative** **framework** **on type approvals.**

**It is remains to be seen whether a scope statement for a CTR will be possible.**

_**DECT**_

**Consideration is being** **given"** **to the need for scope statements on DECT/GSM**
**Dual Mode and DECT/ISDN profile CTRs.**

**2.4** **Market** **Coverage**

**For The following high value segments of the terminal equipment market no**
**single market exists yet:**

**- Simple telephones**

**-Key Systems**

**-PABXs**

**- Private Networks (apart** **from** **leased lines)**

**17**

**' y y ' j ' y t** **«••r--*-^--** **;** **:^~** **'•**

**2,5** **Conformity Assessment Procedures**

**According to Article 3 of the Directive** **91/263/EEC,** **terminal equipment can only**
**be placed on the market and put into service if** **it** **complies with the requirements**
**laid down in the Directive. The verification of equipment's conformity to these**
**requirements is tested during the Conformity Assessment Procedures.**

**The Conformity Assessment Procedures are used to test equipment's conformity**
**to the essential requirements of the Directive. The onus is placed on the**
**manufacturer to gain certification and approval prior to the** **affixingof** **the CE**
**marking and the subsequent placing of the product on the market.**

**Under the** **91/263/EEC** **Directive, a manufacturer can choose between a number**
**of Conformity Assessment Procedures any of which is sufficient to result in**
**approval of the equipment for European market entry, and to allow the**
**manufacturer to affix the CE marking:**

**•** **the full quality assurance procedure (module H), where the manufacturer**
**who operates an approved quality** **system,** **subject to surveillance by a**
**notified body, is enabled to certify that the products concerned satisfy the**
**requirements of the Directive that apply to them.**

**•** **the type examination procedure (module B), where the manufacturer**
**requests a Notified Body to ascertain that a specimen meets the provision of**
**the Directive that apply to it and issue the relevant EC type-examination**
**certificate. Subsequent to this certificate, the manufacturer has two options:**

**L** **to issue a Declaration of Conformity to Type (module C), subject to**

**-**
**control by a notified body using random product checks, or**

**ii.** **to implement a production quality assurance programme (module D)**
**subject to surveillance by a notified body and** **ensure** **in a written**
**declaration of conformity to type that the products concerned are in**
**conformity with the type as described in the EC type-examination.**

**Once the** **procedures-described** **above are completed, the notified bodies shall**
**issue an administrative approval for the connection of the concerned terminal**
**equipment to the public telecommunications** **network.** **Under the Council**
**Decision** **93/465/EEC,** **the CE marking must be affixed during the production**
**control phase. This can only take place after the administrative approval has been**
**issued. It follows that the administrative approval must be issued from** **the**
**notified body chosen for the production control phase. It is this notified body,**
**responsible for issuing the administrative approval and the last body to intervene**
**in the process, whose identification number is used for the CE marking.**

**The complexity of** **the** **mechanism of** **the** **conformity assessment procedures has**
**been criticised as non proportional to** **the** **objective aimed at. While these**
**procedures were appropriate when they were formulated, the change in**
**circumstances since then could mean that review is now required.**

**18**

- ' . . - - . ' - " - [v] ^ - - . . . 

**2.6** **Specifics for the** **Satellite** **Earth Station Directive, 93/97/EEC**

**The satellite earth station Directive extends the** **Terminal** **Equipment Directive** **to**
**include Satellite Earth Stations. The purpose of this Directive is to lay down a**
**mechanism which will permit the effective use of** **orbital** **resources in conjunction**
**with the radio frequency spectrum and avoidance of harmful interference**
**between space-based and terrestrial communications systems and other systems.**
**Therefore this Directive focuses on the space interface of the satellite earth**
**station equipment.**

**The satellite earth station Directive lays down the type approval procedures for**
**equipment which is capable of being used either for transmission only, or for**
**transmission and** **reception,** **or for reception only of radio-communication signals**
**by means of satellites or other space-based systems.** **These type approval**
**procedures aim at safeguarding the following main objectives:**

**- the public telecommunications network**

**- the effective use of the** **frequency** **spectrum**

**-** **the** **effective use of orbital resources and the avoidance of harmful**

**interference between space-based and terrestrial** **communications** **systems**
**and other systems.**

**In view of these main objectives the Directive makes the following distinctions**
**with respect to the conformity assessment procedures to which satellite earth**
**station equipment are subject to:**

**i.** _**Transmit or transmit-receive satellite earth station**_ _**equipments**_ **this**
**equipment may affect the use of the** **frequency** **spectrum and the orbital**
**resources and therefore should always be type approved according to the**
**conformity assessment procedures, laid down by the Directive 91/263/EEC,**
**regardless of its intended use.**
**However, if the equipment is not intended to be connected to the public**
**telecommunications** **network,** **the conformity assessment procedure need not**
**be applied to its terrestrial interface provided that the manufacturer or the**
**.supplier** **fills in the** **appropriate** **declaration of intended use, mentioned in**
**Article 2 of the Directive 91/263/EEC and Article** **11** **of the Directive**

**93/97/EEC**

_**ii.**_ _**Receive only satellite earth station equipment:**_ **this equipment, although it**
**also makes use of the frequency spectrum and orbital resources, does not**
**have the capability to** **affect** **the use or provoke harmful interferences**
**between space-based and terrestrial communications systems and other**
**systems. Therefore the principle of proportionality imposes that with respect**
**to the space interface of this equipment, it is upon the manufacturer to**
**choose either the classical conformity assessment procedures or the**
**Community internal** **production** **control procedures set out in the Annex** **of**
**the Directive** **93/97/EEC,** **the latest being a simple self declaration.**
**Nevertheless, the** **interface** **to the terrestrial network of the receive only**
**equipment is subject to the same rules as terminal equipment and it therefore**
**has to be duly type approved whenever it is intended to be connected to the**

**19**

**public network or accompanied by the** **manufacturer's** **declaration whenever**
**it** **is capable to be connected but not intended for such a purpose.**

**2.7** **Mutual Recognition Arrangements (MRAs)**

**The seventh recital of the Directive** **91/263/EEC** **states:**

_**M**_ _**....real,**_ _**comparable access to third country markets for European**_
_**manufacturers should preferably be achieved through multilateral**_
_**negotiations within**_ _**GATT,**_ _**although bilateral talks between the**_
_**Community**_ _**and third**_ _**countries**_ _**may also contribute to this process.**_ **...** **"***

**This statement gives the foundation for third country negotiations both within the**
**scope of GATT and on an individual country by country basis. In the course of**
**such negotiations the Commission must ensure that the opening up of the**
**Community market in terminal equipment is not unilateral or without full**
**reciprocity.**

**The Council adopted a negotiating mandate for the mutual recognition of**
**conformity assessment procedures between the EU and certain third countries on**
**21 September 1992.**

**The MRAs are expected to include fields such as pharmaceuticals, medical**
**devices, chemicals and telecommunications. The main areas of interest in the**
**telecommunications sector prior to and during negotiations includes the**
**following:**

**•** **agreement on sectors for inclusion in the MRA and precise definition of**
**these sectors;**

**•** **legal framework regarding** **market** **access** **for** **third** **country**
**manufacturers, including any** **tariff** **origin or technical barriers;**

**•** **conformity assessment procedures including mechanisms, bodies and**
**standards within the negotiating countries and the criteria used for**
**evaluation of test** **files** **from** **third country testing agencies;**

**•** **the essential requirements governing equipment eligible for conformity**
**assessment; and**

**•** **the bodies responsible for the formulation of standards for conformity**

**v** **.** **assessment.**

**In addition there are several horizontal issues that must be addressed in an MRA.**

**These include intellectual property rights, product liability laws (as applied to the**
**manufacturer,** **the** **certification body, the accreditation authority, the importer,**
**and the distributor) and origin** **rules.**

- Council Directive 91/263/EEC, OJ No L 128, 23.5.1991, p. 2.

**,-** **-** **20**

###### **_w:^< [r;] ^_**

**The Commission began negotiations with the US.,** **Canada,** **Australia and New**
**Zealand in 1994, these being the priority countries for the conclusion of Mutual**
**Recognition Agreements with the European Union. For each of these countries,**
**telecommunications terminal equipment is regarded as a a priority sector.**

**In the case of Australia and New Zealand, encouraging progress has been made**
**in drafting the telecommunications part of the agreement. Both of these countries**
**are willing to base an agreement on full mutual recognition including the function**
**of certification.**

**Progress has been slower with USA and Canada because both countries would**
**prefer to use an approach which first would conclude an agreement on mutual**
**recognition of test results. The European approach is to** **pursue** **an agreement**
**based on full mutual recognition of testing and certification.**

**In addition to continuing discussions with the first four priority countries,**
**negotiations will begin in 1995 with Japan and Switzerland.**

**A difficulty which needs to be overcome is that a substantial proportion of the**
**European telecommunications terminals market is not yet harmonised. Particular**
**examples are PSTN voice terminals and certain classes of radio equipment. These**
**areas continue to be subject to national regulation. In many of** **the** **national legal**
**systems it is not currently possible to transfer national rights to a third country to**
**work as a notified body.**

**2.8** **Relations with EFTA Countries**

**The European Union enjoys** **close** **co-operation with the EFTA countries in**
**telecommunications. As a result it is the Commission's policy to extend the** **'one**
**stop** **approval'** **market to include the EFTA nations, within the framework of the**
**European Economic Area (EEA). EFTA Member State delegations currently**
**attend the ACTE meetings, but they have only observer status and are therefore**
**not entitled to express their opinion on draft measures. The EFTA Secretariat**
**and the EFTA Surveillance Authority are** **also.** **represented with observer**
**delegations. This participation by EFTA is in accordance with the procedure**
**adopted by the Commission on** **1** **June 1994** **[9]** **.**

**The EFTA countries and the EU Member States have, through the Agreement**
**establishing the European Economic Area (EEA), extended the principle of the**
**four freedoms (free movement of goods, persons, services and capital) of the**
**single market to cover all 17 countries. The EEA Agreement entered into force**
**on 1 January 1994. The EEA, which is based on EC legislation existing on that**
**date, provides for the legislative** **framework** **in terms of** **trade** **market access and**
**competition rules throughout the region. The EFTA countries have accepted the**
**Community acquis in the field of technical harmonisation and the principle of a**
**single mutually recognised testing and certification regime and a single CE**
**marking regime within the EEA** **The** **general principles on the free movement** **of**
**goods as expressed in Articles 30 and 36 (Articles** **11** **and, 13 of the EEA**

**9** **Procedure** **d'information** **et de consultation pendant la période de** **pre-adhesion,** **SEC (94) 909 et** **/2.**

**21**

**Agreement) and the relevant rulings of the EC Court of Justice are also**
**applicable in the EFTA countries (Article 6 of the EEA Agreement).**

**Switzerland, although a member of** **EFTA,** **has not joined the EEA but will**
**nevertheless implement the technical part of the CTRs. The operation of this**
**unique arrangement has not yet been** **finalised.** **Liechtenstein has formally ratified**
**the EEA Agreement in May** **1995** **following modification of** **their** **customs union**
**with Switzerland .**

**The EFTA countries have taken the** **necessary institutiorial** **measures to ensure**
**the good functioning of the EEA by setting up the Standing** **Commitfee** **of the**
**EFTA State, the EFTA Surveillance Authority and the EFTA Court. Joint**
**EFTA-EU** **institutions have also been created such as the EEA Joint Committee,**
**which is responsible for taking decisions regarding the development of the EEA**
**to new EU legislation and its homogeneous application throughout the EEA.**

**The modus operandi of the CTR regime within the EEA has not yet been**
**finalised. Under the** **EEA,** **any new EU legislation must be ratified by the**
**EU/EFTA** **Joint Committee. Following this** **ratification,** **each of the EFTA-EEA**
**Member States transposes this new legislation into national law. In the EU**
**Member States, power can be transferred from the Member States and the**
**Council of Ministers to a Committee (in the case of the CTR regime, this is**
**ACTE) in order to be adopted.**

**This difference in procedure, brought about because CTRs are considered as new**
**legislation and not as acquis communitaire to the 91/263 or the 93/97 Directives,**
**could result in the EFTA-EEA Member States erecting barriers to trade by**
**delaying the adoption of the CTR into their national law, while having full access**
**to the** **markets** **in other EEA Member States.**

**Following the accession to the European Union of** **Austria,** **Finland and** **Sweden,**
**the relationship between the EU and EFTA under the EEA framework will have**
**to adapt to the new situation.**

**22**

**3.** **PROBLEMS** **ENCOUNTERED** **DURING THE IMPLEMENTATION** **OF** **THE** **DIRECTIVE**

**The following sections examine a number of issues that have arisen during the**
**application of the Directive.**

**3,1** **Experience** **on the Scope of Directive 91/263/EEC**

**The following issues relating to the** **scope,** **of the Directive have been identified.**

_**Equipment not intended to be connected to the network: Can a grey market**_
_**develop?.**_

**The Directive 91/263/EEC concerns telecommunications equipment capable of**
**being connected to the public telecommunication network in order to send,**
**process or receive information. A critical principle of the Directive is that all**
**equipment with the physical characteristics of telecommunications equipment**
**must have affixed a marking which will indicate whether or not it can be**
**connected to a public** **network.** **The marking thus, serves two purposes: it enables**
**a surveillance authority to easily identify the approval status of the equipment**
**while at the same time informing the user of the intended purpose of the**
**equipment.**

**The Directive distinguishes between equipment intended to be connected to the**
**public** **telecommunications** **network and equipment not intended for such a**
**purpose and provides that it is only the** **first** **one which should be type approved.**

**In 1991, when the Directive was adopted, it was quite clear that the main**
**prerequisites of the type approval procedures were the protection of the public**
**network and the interoperability of the terminal equipment with the public**
**network or via the public** **network.** **Accordingly, to the extent that these**
**objectives were** **met,** **there was no need for further regulation. Consequently,**
**equipment having the physical characteristics of terminal equipment but not**
**intended to be connected to the public network did not need any further**
**regulation.**

**Given the** **construction** **of the present Directive this approach undoubtedly has a**
**solid logical basis.** **The Directive imposes mandatory CTRs to terminal**
**equipment intended to be connected to the public network. The extension of**
**these mandatory standards to all equipment with the physical characteristics of**
**terminal equipment, disregarding its use, could not be justified by the aims of the**
**Directive.**

**It has however been argued that the distinction between** **equipment** **intended to**
**be connected to the network and** **equipment** **not intended to be connected may**
**permit the creation of a** **"grey"** **market. Manufacturers could declare that then-**
**product is not intended to be connected to the public network and thus avoid the**
**cumbersome procedures of type approval. In this way providers would be** **able** **to**
**place their equipment in the market at a considerably lower cost than if the**
**equipment was type approved. If the user connected this unapproved equipment**
**to the** **network,** **he would assume all risks and responsibilities thereof.** **The**
**possible solutions are the following:**

**23**

i. Amend the Directive in such way that all equipment capable for being
connected directly or indirectly to the network will have to be type approved:

This solution would prevent the creation of a "grey" market but at the same
time it would not be in line with the principle of proportionality. The theory
of New Approach Directives is that legislative harmonisation should be
limited to the adoption of those essential requirements with which products
put on the market must conform [10] . The essential requirements which one
should safeguard in the area of terminal equipment are the safety of the
network and interoperability (safety of user and of employees are adequately
regulated by Directive 73/23/EEC, EMC by Directive 89/336/EEC).
However if a terminal is not connected to the public network, none of these
essential requirements are in issue any more and therefore there is no
justification for a type approval procedure.

ii. Provide for national measures which will deter the fraud in an efficient way.

The Directive requires Member States to lay down efficient mechanisms for
this purpose. This could be achieved by drawing the attention of the users
to their responsibilities in case of misuse of the terminal equipment.
Manufacturers, in particular, have expressed the view that there must be a
balance between regulation and surveillance in order to deter grey importers
while not overly penalising legitimate manufacturers. This implies some
harmonisation of surveillance between Member States.

The user should be adequately informed about the significance of the
markings as well as the possible penalties and other consequences in case of
a misuse of the equipment.

iii. Simplify the requirements to reduce costs of approval and minimise time to
market.

This would reduce the relative advantage that the grey market has compared
to manufacturers who follow the correct regulatory route. It should also
reduce the cost of products and improve the responsiveness to the market
place.

The risk is that problems may arise with compatibility between the terminal
equipment and the networks to which they are connected.

_**Equipment**_ _**indirectly connected to the public network: do personal computers**_
_**and other IT equipment fall**_ _**within**_ _**the scope of this definition ?**_

As mentioned above, the Directive only regulates the placing on the market and
connection to the network of equipment intended to be connected to **the** public
network. This can only be equipment directly connected to the termination of the
public network or equipment which interworks with a public telecom network

10 Council Resolution of 7 May 1985 on a new approach to technical harmonisation and standards
(85/C136/01).

**24**

.           - • M » « > . -, > | [,] ^ « » i

**being connected directly or indirectly to the network in order to send, process or**
**receive information.**

**It follows from this definition that only equipment capable of interworking with**
**the network can fall within the scope of the Directive. The term interworking**
**contains a clear element of interaction with the network which limits the scope of**
**the Directive only to equipment which has this capability.**

**Therefore in the case of IT equipment, it is the network interface circuitry,**
**integrated or not in the IT equipment, which ensures** **the interworking** **of the IT**
**with the network and which therefore has to be type approved together with the**
**software drivers responsible for** **initiating,** **terminating or modifying the call.**

**An in-depth analysis of the objectives of the Directive will lead to the same**
**conclusion. The Directive mainly aims at ensuring the protection of the network**
**and the interoperability of the terminal with the network or via the network. It**
**would not therefore be reasonable to impose type approval procedures on IT**
**equipment on the basis of this Directive as far as this equipment functions**
**independently from the network.**

**There is considerable variation across Member States on the approach on**
**indirectly connected terminals. These approaches vary from having no**
**requirements for such equipment beyond that required for directly connected**
**equipment to having a range of requirements for the indirectly connected**
**terminals themselves as well as the switching equipment such as PABX or key**
**systems. These requirements include such aspects as the protection of privacy**
**and the provision of** **facilities** **for users with** **special** **needs e.g. Visually**
**Handicapped Operators Consoles. There is an urgent need to resolve this issues**
**since private switching equipment represents one of the largest markets** **for**
**telecommunications terminal equipment in Europe.**

**There is considerable support for the view that Article 2, referring** **-to** **equipment**
**which is capable but not intended for connection to the public network is**
**confusing and of little practical benefit. It would also remove the requirement for**
**negative marking which is not found to be helpful by many parties (see Para** **3*3).**
**Classes of equipment** **wtiich** **could fall under this article are modems used only for**
**private** **network** **links but it is difficult for a manufacturer to confirm the**
**"intention** **of** **a** **user of** **such** **a portable item. Another example is radio equipment**
**not intended for connection but the considerations in Para 3.2 below should**

**cover concerns in this area.**

**3.2** **The coverage of radio equipment**

**There is ambiguity on which radio equipment is covered by the Directive 91/263.**

**The ambiguity relates to whether or not the radio frequency spectrum is part of**
**the "public telecommunications network" due to the fact that it is a limited**
**natural resource accessible to all, including the fixed public telecommunications**
**network.** **If the spectrum is regarded as part of** **the** **public network, any terminal**
**equipment which makes use of** **a** **system of communication employing the radio**
**frequency spectrum would be presumed to be intended for connection to the**
**public telecommunications** **network.**

**25**

**•vrv.'**

**On the other hand, if the spectrum is not regarded as part of the network**
**infrastructure, only radio terminal equipment which is intended to interwork with**
**the fixed telecommunications network would be covered by the Directive.**

**The Commission believes that the intention of the Council was to include the**

**radio frequency spectrum which is allocated to public telecommunications within**
**the definition of public network infrastructure and that terminal equipment**
**capable of making use of this spectrum would fall under the TTE Directive. This**
**intention would be made unambiguous by introducing the following alternative**
**text in Article 1.3 of the Directive : "However, equipment which is capable of**
**connection to the public telecommunications network and which uses the radio**
**frequency spectrum for connection** **and/or** **communication is equipment for which**
**the procedures of article 2 may not be** **applied."**

**3.3** **Marking Regime**

**A series of Directives, designed to remove technical barriers to trade, provided**
**for the affixing of the CE marking. Each one of these Directives sets forth its**
**own rules for the use and the design of the CE marking. In the interest of**
**simplifying Community legislation and making it more consistent, the Council**
**adopted Directive** **93/68/EEC** **which aims to replace the various provisions of** **all**
**these Directives with uniform prescriptions. However, the Directive remains**
**optional until 1st January 1997 so that manufacturers will be able to adjust**
**gradually to the new situations and to sell their stocks of products manufactured**
**in line with the rules that were previously in force, bearing the non-harmonised**
**markings.**

**When the manufacturer follows the harmonised regime and** **affixes** **the EC**
**marking on the terminal equipment as described in Directive 93/68/EEC, this**
**marking indicates that the equipment is also presumed to conform to the**
**provisions of all other Directives that may be applicable to it. With respect to**
**terminal equipment, the Directives that may be applicable are the 91/263/EEC**
**TTE Directive, the** **73/23/EEC** **Low Voltage Directive and the** **89/336/EEC**
**Electromagnetic Compatibility Directive.**

**The aspect of dual marking appears in some cases where the manufacturer may**
**have an interest in placing on the market terminal equipment which complies at**
**the same time with national requirements and to a** **CTR.** **This could be the case,**
**for instance, with EURO ISDN terminal equipment which also is designed to**
**conform to additional national sets of requirements. In this case, two different**
**markings need to be affixed to the equipment. This is acceptable if the**
**documentation accompanying the equipment explicitly indicates the meaning of**
**each of the markings affixed.**

**The practical** **application** **of the marking regime has necessitated many**
**discussions with industry representatives. This, in** **turn,** **has led to clarifications**
**being given concerning the marking of the equipment for which neither CTRs nor**
**harmonised standards exist; for indirectly connected equipment and for**
**equipment consisting of sub assemblies need only have marks placed on the**
**telecommunications related elements. For example, communications software**

**26**

**which can be loaded into a personal computer can only convey marking**
**information** **in** **the literature supplied with the product.**

**Industry and some regulators have expressed concerns regarding the**
**effectiveness of negative marking according to Annex VII of Directive 91/263, as**
**a mechanism to control the grey market and they have proposed that negative**
**marking should be abandoned. . It should be noted, however, that the intention of**
**the negative marking was more to open up markets for off-network equipment**
**rather than to specifically control the grey market.**

**3.4** **The slowness of the standardisation process**

**The implementation of Directive 91/263/EEC and its amending Directives has**
**been hampered, among other things, by the delays in standardisation of the**
**technical areas within ETSI where deliverables have often been over a year late.**
**This has resulted in late availability of TBRs to be adopted as CTRs and**
**therefore of harmonised technical regulations governing particular equipment**
**types.** **Some of the problems encountered have stemmed from** **inaccurate**
**forecasting of the work involved at the outset, with subsequent pressure to**
**maintain the optimistic deadlines.**

**The choice of approval procedure to be followed within ETSI needs to be clearly**
**agreed at an early stage. The normal practice is to avoid the use of accelerated**
**procedures for regulatory documents. In principle, the accelerated procedures**
**exist to speed up the approval of 'non-contentious' issues. However because of**
**the need to generate and adopt the TBRs quickly, the accelerated procedures**
**have been used in** **an** **attempt to speed up the elaboration of TBRs which may**
**contain contentious issues. This can result in failed votes which require reference**
**back and consequently result in no saving of time.**

**The lack of TBRs and CTRs for particular equipment types has meant that, in**
**practice, some of these areas have been governed by the NET regime. This has**
**caused confusion for manufacturers and suppliers, particularly those new to the**
**European market, in that under the NET regime, approval must be applied for in**
**each of the Member States, but under the CTR regime, now governing**
**equipment types for which CTRs exist, approval need only be granted in one**
**Member State for the product to be placed on the market throughout the EU.**

**The delays during the production of European Telecommunications Standards**
**have been particularly noticeable in the ISDN and DECT cases.**

**The delays to the DECT standards were partly caused by the lack of personnel**
**wjthin** **ETSI and the manufacturers to develop these standards because a greater**
**emphasis was placed on the development of standards for GSM. This point is**
**specifically mentioned in the recent Green Paper on Mobile Communications:**

_**"DECT**_ _**has [...] faced a number of issues during development**_

_**[including] competition from**_ _**investment**_ _**in the development of GSM,**_
_**resulting in a shortage of manpower for the development of the**_

**27**

_**f**_ **-•**

_**>••">**_ _**v~-**_ _**•**_

_**standard [and] as with**_ _**GSM,**_ _**there have been delays in getting CTRs**_
_**approved**_ _**in**_ _**good**_ _**time.**_ _**"**_ _**[l l ]**_

**The delays in development of** **the** **TBRs within ETSI stem partly from the way in**
**which ETSI itself** **operates.** **It has to be noted that the right level of** **resources,** **is**
**not always put at the disposal of** **the** **recognised standardisation** **organisations,** **in**
**particular in the case of** **ETSI,** **by the ETSI members themselves. It is essential**
**to have the timely availability of experts whereby work on the identified technical**
**basis for regulations can be effected speedily and within the time schedule**
**envisaged. It may be** **that** **the non-availability of experts is due to the relative**
**priority of the class of terminals being addressed with respect to market needs.**
**Where this is the cause, this should be made clear.**

**In addition, experience has shown that when ETSI needs help on interpretation**
**of the essential requirements laid down by both Directives, this guidance is not**
**communicated in an effective way to ETSI.** **The current procedures of**
**requesting help and receiving a response via a chain involving the ETSI TBR**
**manager, an ETSI rapporteur, a TRAC correspondent and thence reporting back**
**to the Commission Services have great scope for improvement. A direct route of**
**communication between the Commission services and ETSI** **TCs** **and STCs is**

**available by the use of Commission Counsellors but a lack of resources on the**
**part of the Commission Services has reduced the effectiveness of this mechanism.**

**Delays have also been introduced by the lack of clear guidance from the**
**regulators. In some cases it has taken a number of ACTE meetings to resolve**
**certain issues e.g. the X.25 layer issue, the ERMES CTR issue/the coverage of**
**TETRA by** **91/263,** **indirectly connected terminals.**

**Having regard to the timely development of TBRs experience has also shown**
**that the ETSI** **TC/STC** **working practices, in particular regarding the consensus**
**making process and the resolution procedures following a Public Enquiry, are**
**too slow and cumbersome. It is believed that considerable time could be saved**

**if, from the beginning of the TBR** **work,** **the working practices would take into**
**account for agreement at the** **final** **voting stage.**

**The need for a review of the working procedures of European standards**
**organisations in the development of harmonised standards is urgent as indicated**
**by the recent Bangemann Group Report:**

_**"The Group recommends a review of the European standardisation**_
_**process in order to increase its speed and responsiveness to**_ _**markets.**_ _**"**_ _**[n ]**_

**T^his** **report highlights three levels at which action should be taken to rectify the**
**present situation: operators, investors and public procurement offices should**
**establish an MoU to set specification requirements which would provide input to**

11 COM (94) 145. 27.04.1994, Towards a Personal Communications Environment: Green Paper on a
Common Approach in the field of mobile and personal communications within the European Union,
Annex A Section 2.2.

12 "Europe and the global information society: Recommendations to the European Council", The
Bangemann High-Lcvel Group on the Information Society, 26 May 1994, p. 14.

**28**

_**'J.">**_ **-** ***** ***** **».•'."** **'•** **' • • . - - .**

**the recognised standardisation bodies as a way of increasing market**
**responsiveness; the European standards institutes should be encouraged to**
**establish their work programmes on the basis of** **market** **priorities.**

**3.5** **Experiences in the Elaboration of TBRs**

**There have been a number of problems encountered within ETSI during the**
**course of elaboration of the CTRs requested by the Commission. These problems**
**have slowed down the production of the TBRs or have stifled debate on technical**
**issues. Frequently, the standards upon which the TBRs are based prove not** **to** **be**
**fit for the purpose and result in much more work being required than was**
**originally predicted. The resulting delays are not highlighted early enough and**
**therefore not reflected in the** **workplan.**

**The Commission also believes that work on regulatory standards should**
**concentrate on what is** **'essential'** **in some technical areas. For example, no firm**
**position has been reached concerning the inclusion of all three layers in TBR2**
**(X.25 Network Access) despite several attempts at reaching agreement. This has**
**resulted in ETSI developing full three layer** **[13]** **documents when only Layer 1**
**could be required** **[14]** **. A similar problem occurred with the TBR 9 (GSM Phase 1**
**Telephony Attachment Requirements) and its** **'bis',** **'ter*** **and** **'quad*** **extensions.**
**Subsequently, the** ***bis',** **'ter"** **and** **'quad'** **extensions have not been adopted as CTRs,**
**but considered as voluntary standards.** **These types of problems result in**
**significant delays due to the extra work involved.**

**There are problems in** **developing** **the TBRs as ETSI is** **frequently** **lacking a well**
**defined interpretation of the applicability of the Directives. To take a recent**
**example, it is still unclear how satellite networks will be regulated. The question**
**arises as to whether or not the satellite network is part of the infrastructure as**
**defined under 91/263/EEC and as to which side of the satellite is considered as**

**the Network Termination Point for the purposes of developing a TBR. Clear and**
**consistent guidance by the Commission must be given to ETSI in this area.**

**After à slow start, in some areas, ETSI has learnt that better structuring of the**
**test parts is a key factor in speeding-up the production and improving the quality**
**of the TBRs. As a consequence, the new TBRs 19 & 20 (GSM Phase 2) should**
**provide a significant improvement to the testing regime for** **GSM**

**The Commission** **believes** **that there should be more involvement of technical**

**experts during the planning phases of TBR** **production,** **so that more realistic and**
**accurate time scales and resource predictions are indicated from the beginning of**
**the** **work.**

**A particular problem has been the delays resulting from the requirement to**
**translate the TBRs into all Union languages. This problem has been made worse**
**by the enlargement of the Union. The use of harmonised standards may alleviate**
**this problem.**

**13** **i.e.** **including only the three lowest layers** **of** **the ISO Open Systems** **Interconnect** **7 Layer** **Model.**

**14** **ACTE has issued an** **informal** **opinion that only** **level** **1 should be** **regulated.**

**29**

**There have been difficulties with the maintenance of CTRs following adoption.**
**Formally amendments cannot be made without following a process which is**
**equivalent to adopting anew** **CTR.** **A pragmatic solution has been adopted by the**
**issuing of Advisory Notes which clarify the ISDN and GSM CTRs. However,**
**there is no legal status for these notes. Consideration should be given to an**
**efficient process whereby CTRs can be maintained in a controlled manner in the**
**light of experience.** **A possible solution could be based upon the official**
**corrigendum procedure.**

**3.6** **Harmonised standards and CTRs**

**Directive 91/263/EEC has been based on the principles laid down by the Council**
**resolution of 7 May 1985 on the New Approach to technical harmonisation and**
**standards. According to these principles, the legislative harmonisation should be**
**limited to the adoption of** **the** **essential requirements in the general interest. The**
**elaboration of these essential requirements into harmonised standards is entrusted**
**to the standardisation bodies. Compliance with these harmonised standards gives**
**presumption of conformity to the relevant essential requirements.**

**The Directive 91/263/EEC diverges from the classical New Approach model by**
**imposing mandatory standards CTRs for reasons explained the recitals of the**
**Directive:**

_**"whereas in respect of the essential requirements related**_ _**to**_
_**interworking with public telecommunications networks and in cases**_
_**where it is**_ _**justified,**_ _**through**_ _**such**_ _**networks,**_ _**it is generally not possible**_
_**to comply with such requirements other than by the application of**_
_**unique technical solutions; whereas such solutions shall therefore be**_
_**mandatory.**_ _**"**_

**While this** **recital** **suggests that interworking of the equipment with the network**
**can be achieved only through a unique technical** **solution,** **the qualification** **[ M]** **in**
**generaT** **implies that exceptions of this general rule are possible.**

**This position is reinforced by Article 6 par. 2 of the Directive where it is**
**provided that:**

**"**
_**the Commission**_ _**shall**_ **...** _**adopt**_ **...** _**the measure identifying the type**_ _**of**_
_**terminal equipment for which a common technical regulation is**_
_**required..."**_

**It follows that terminal equipment is the subject of** **CTR** **only if this is considered**
**necessary.** **It is for the Commission to identify in which** **cases** **the interworking of**
**terminal equipment with the network can only be achieved through a unique**
**technical solution and propose the corresponding CTRs to the ACTE committee.**
**In** **all other cases, the principles of the New Approach apply in their entirety.**
**Where delay in the production of a CTR is prejudicing the development of the**
**European Type Approval regime the Commission can propose the use of**
**harmonised standards.**

**30**

**«»-i>«t-r-*T>**** **[-]** **f«** **[e,]** **?»i-^'">** **•** **'** **[r]** **'** **w** **.rç~-:** **r** **"**
**\- ****
**-.** **.-***

**Consequently it is the Commission Services position that :- In the absence of a**
**CTR but in the presence of** **a** **relevant harmonised standard whose reference has**
**been published in the EU Official Journal, compliance of terminal equipment to**
**the essential requirements laid down in Article 4 of Directive** **91/263/EEC** **will be**
**presumed. Terminal equipment compliant with these essential requirements can**
**be affixed the EC marking and circulate freely in the EU. The absence of the**
**CTR may either be due to delay in its production or to the fact that a CTR is not**
**required.**

**Notwithstanding the clear Commission Services position on this matter, certain**
**Member States believe that, due to the nature of the transposition of the**
**Directive into national law and their interpretation of European law. harmonised**
**standards may not be used as described above. Furthermore, doubts have been**
**expressed as to the practicality of using harmonised standards in a consistent**
**manner. The Member States who have reservations of the use of harmonised**

**standards believe it is most important to ensure that there is no ambiguity in any**
**new legislation.**

**3.7** **Competition amongst Designated Laboratories**

**Member States are in the process of notifying to the Commission not only the**
**national notified bodies but also the designated laboratories. It would be useful**
**for Member States to also notify organisations which are accredited to make**
**audits for the approval of quality assurance systems according to Annex III and**
**IV of Directive 91/263/EEC.**

**Regarding Notified Bodies, a list has been published in the Official Journal** **[15]** **.**
**This list contains 18 entries covering 10 of** **the** **then Member States plus** **Austria,**
**Finland, Norway and Sweden.**

**Laboratories may be designated either with respect to CTRs or TBRs once they**
**have passed the adoption procedure.**

**Given that manufacturers also can choose Notified Bodies, competition has**
**therefore started between both laboratories and Notified Bodies. It is most**

**important that laboratories are truly independent, including lack of subsidy as**
**part of a larger organisation and cross subsidy from other work. In order to give**
**confidence to the market, the need for full independence and transparency is**
**particularly important where an designated test house has in the past been within**
**a network** **operator's** **overall organisation. The Commission will also ensure that**
**in practice mutual recognition of approvals and results will operate fairly and**
**with full reciprocity between all Member States.**

**3.8** **Responsiveness of Processes Supporting the Directives**

**The speed of resolution of issues relating to the implementation of the directives**
**has been criticised. This is, in part, due to the complexity of** **the** **subject and the**
**many different interest groups both within and between Member States. An**

**15** **OJNo.** **C203,** **23.07.1994**

**31**

**example of this complexity is the process whereby the specification of what is**
**truly an** **"essential"** **requirement as defined under article. 4 of the Directive**
**involves technical, regulatory, marketing, legal and testing considerations as well**
**as a full understanding of the intentions of the Directives. All this has to be**
**resolved in an environment where technology, markets and regulatory policy are**
**all changing rapidly.**

**Issues such as the above example are resolved by the various bodies described in**
**Annex 1 and** **co-ordinated** **by Commission Services having consulted ACTE.**
**Since most of the bodies involved are** **representative** **for all the regulatory and**
**economic players, the process can become cumbersome resulting in slowness**
**and, in some cases, loss of** **focus.**

**Further delays can be introduced following the resolution of issues due to the**
**nature and performance of the instruments used to implement decisions such as**
**Commission Decisions. Often legal opinion is sought which can introduce further**
**delays.**

**While many of the delays experienced in the resolution of problems may be**
**inevitable, it is suggested that in any review of the current Directives the**
**following issues should be considered:-**

**The task being tackled seems too complex and should be simplified.**

**The right balance between the extent of the requirements, the heaviness of the**
**regulation and the extent of the surveillance should be established.**

**The processes should be improved, perhaps by applying techniques such as**
**Business Process Re-engineering.**

**3.9** **Assessment of Conformity**

**Concerns have been expressed on the difficulties experienced in ensuring**
**consistency in the application of the procedures of the Directive between**
**Member States. In order to ensure that there is a consistent interpretation of the**
**Directive the European Organisation of Testing and Certification has been**
**mandated to produce the "Handbook on Implementation of Conformity**
**Assessment Procedures relating to Directive 91/263/EEC". This handbook has**
**been prepared by the ADLNB members. In general the Handbook is seen as a**
**useful clarification of the Directive. There was a general belief that the**
**interpretation included in Annex 2 of the Handbook** **was too onerous.**
**Consequently this part of the handbook has been redrafted to meet these**

**concerns.**

**32**

**4 .** **P E R S P E C T I V E S** **F O R** **T H E** **F U T U R E**

**The regime has been criticised as extremely rigid and it has been argued that in practice**
**the Directives have not always equally met the requirements of all parties** **i.e.** **residential**
**customers,** **business** **customers,** **terminal** **manufacturers,** **network** **equipment**
**manufacturers, new operators, established operators, regulators. Manufacturers have been**
**arguing that the telecommunications industry has changed to such an extent that there is**
**no longer a need for such a stringent type approval regime. This may be true.** **.It** **has also**
**been noted that large sectors of the market are not** **yét** **addressed** **e.£** **analogue telephones**
**and PABX. The experience gained by the implementation of** **the** **present Directive and the**
**comments that the Commission has received from the various interested parties lead the**
**Commission to the conclusion that the following points may require reconsideration:**

**4.1** **Essential Requirements**

**According** **to one of the fundamental principles of the new** **approach,** **the**
**legislative harmonisation shall be limited to the adoption of the essential safety**
**requirements (or other requirements in the general interest).**

**One of the essential requirements laid down by Directive** **91/263/EEC** **is the**
**interoperability of the terminal with the network and in justified cases the**
**interoperability of the terminals via the network. There is however a concern**
**whether interoperability ought to be retained as an essential requirement in the**
**present Directive.**

**On the one hand the** **TransEuropean** **Network provision of Articles 129 b), 129**
**c),** **and J** **29 i), calls for deriving the full benefits of TENs and by** **"promoting**
**interconnection and interoperability of national networks as well as access to**
**such networks". These objectives would be enhanced if they were complemented**
**by a single European market for compatible terminals. The changes in the**
**regulatory environment and markets for new network providers means that the**
**old definition of the term "public network" is becoming more and more**
**impractical for this purpose.** **Interconnection** **and** **inter-operability** **requirements**
**may have an** **effect-on** **any re-definition** **of** **the currently defined essential**
**requirements.** **. ' . . . -**

**In** **addition,** **due account should be taken of the Civil Protection Code. For**
**example, the European Emergency number** **"112"** **can only be used if a** **112** **call**
**can be made, if the Emergency Centre can be reached, if the type of**
**distress/emergency** **situation can be communicated and repeated and if**
**instructions can be received by the caller. Other references could be given to**
**tracing** **or erroneous call, to** **interception,** **and to the public security exemption**
**clause of Article 36 of the Treaty.**

**On the other hand, other Approval regimes such as the US appear to function**
**well with a much more limited definition of what is "essential" and there is a**

**general desire to reduce the complexity and cost of type** **approvals.**

**These issues along with others like the potential regulation of aspects such as the**
**regulation of** **terminals** **for people with special needs suggest that a fundamental**

**33**

**review is required of the definition of what is truly "essential" and of the**
**mechanisms that ensure compliance to those requirements, in particular, the**
**CTRs and the use of harmonised standards. The Commission has started work on**

**this review.**

**4.2** **Conformity assessment procedures: The time for simplification.**

**The conformity assessment procedures of the Directive have been criticised as**
**complex,** **lengthy and costly.** **Furthermore** **it can be argued that the complexity of**
**these procedures may favour the development of the grey market.**

**These concerns could be addressed in two different ways:**

**Firstly, the principle of using the models of the Global Approach already referred**
**to in the Directives should be maintained. However, each of the procedures**
**could be revisited for the purpose of relaxing the requirements as contained in the**
**current annexes. It would, in addition, be highly desirable to scrutinise the**
**rationale for the test cases themselves. Furthermore, a number of identified test**
**suites could be entrusted to a manufacturers declaration according to Module A.**
**In this process the Notified Bodies would still maintain the principle of** **safe-**
**guarding appearing in an a priori assessment. Such a three step relaxation is in**
**fully line with the spirit of the Directives.**

**Secondly, a procedure totally relying on** **full** **confidence in a manufacturers**
**declaration is theoretically possible.**

**This** **wouM** **imply that:**

**- self declaration of the manufacturer or the importer: according to Module**
**A the EC declaration of conformity certifies that the product concerned**
**complies with the relevant CTRs or harmonised standards. A notified body**
**should subsequently issue the administrative approval on the basis of this**
**self declaration. The notified body should keep a register with these self**
**declarations, available to all other notified bodies or national authorities.**
**Further to this procedure,** **the** **manufacturer will be able to affix the CE**
**marking of conformity on the terminal and place it on the market.**

**- such an a posteriori philosophy would require intensive market surveillance**
**and strict penalties should be provided for the manufacturer who has made a**
**false declaration.** **Under most national laws, a false declaration to an**
**authority may generate penal, administrative and civil responsibilities.**

**There is however very different and strong views regarding a priori versus a**
**posteriori assessments. In particular regarding radio communications it seems**
**rather impossible to** **rely** **on a posteriori** **assessments.** **It should therefore be**
**considered to further investigate the** **first** **route outlined above.**

**It may well be** **necessary** **to improve the effectiveness of market surveillance**
**carried out by the Member States in order to complement a possible**
**simplification in conformity assessment procedures**

**34**

v>sy ***£*<«»**

**4.3** **Modifications of the scope of the Directive**

**The current scope of the Directive distinguished' between terminal equipment**
**intended to be connected to a public network versus equipment not intended to**
**be connected to a public network.** **With the appearance of private**
**telecommunications networks in particular in the business sector as described in a**
**recent report presented to the ETSI Business Telecommunications Technical**
**Committee (TC-BTC), due consideration needs to be taken of the existence of**
**this large and quickly growing market** **.with** **respect to the objectives of the**
**directives.**

**4.4** **The Rationale for a Radio Equipment Directive**

**As already discussed certain types of radio equipment does not fall within the**
**scope of the Directive. However the free circulation of this equipment can be**
**lawfully** **impeded by national authorities on the grounds of possible harmful**
**interferences. The radio spectrum is a limited natural resource and accordingly**
**the effective use of radio frequency spectrum is an essential requirement which**
**can** **justify the adoption of harmonisation measures at a Community level.**

**Mobile telecommunications are currently the most flourishing sector in the whole**
**telecommunication area.** **Private business gain every day efficiency by the**
**introduction of radio closed user groups which permit the employees to move**
**around while keeping permanently in touch with their offices.** **Consequently,**
**manufacturers urgently need a harmonised and stable legal** **framework** **which will**
**permit them to create strong economies of scale in this new strategic market.**

**There is a clear preference for there not to be** **a separate** **Radio Directive but to**
**include any radio terminal specific requirements within a single terminals**
**directive. To this end, the Commission envisages the amendment of the**
**Directives which would lay down a harmonised type approval scheme for**
**communications terminal equipment making use of telecommunications allocated**
**spectrum. Care will be necessary in defining the borderline between spectrum**
**management and EMC. It is presumed that spectrum allocation aspects will**
**continue to fall outside the scope of any terminals directive.**

**4.5** **Relations with ETSI**

**The harmonised standards drawn up in respect of the essential requirements**
**applicable** **is** **entrusted** **to** **the** **recognised** **standardisation** **bodies**
**ETSI/CEN/CENELEC.** **Up until now most CTRs were based in their entirety**
**upon TBRs produced and agreed by ETSI although CENELEC has been**
**involved in some aspects of EMC. The relation with ETSI is therefore of**
**particular interest. As the Commission has the special status of Councillor at**
**ETSI the co-operation in the administrative level is recognised by both parties as**
**being efficient, professional and satisfactory. At the technical level, and for a**
**number of reasons covered in previous sections, ETSI has not been capable of**
**finalising a number of deliverables at the point in time originally forecast.**

**35**

The Commission believes that ETSI TC/STC working practices can be made
more effective within the current ETSI Rules of Procedure. This proposal forms
the basis of Recommendation Number 3.

Furthermore, experience is proving that the maintenance of adopted TBRs needs
to be addressed with high priority

The Resolution recently adopted at the ETSI General Assembly upon a proposal
from the High Level Task Force provides for an important restructuring within
ETSI whereby the concerns above could be lifted. „   -   - •

4.6 Liberalisation of Infrastructure

As already indicated the current type approval legislation has been built upon the
concept of public telecommunications network. The security of this network as
well as its harmonious function with connected equipment were considered a
public concern justifying regulation, for it represented a huge investment serving
special national interest.

However, the definition given to this public infrastructure by the Directive clearly
refers to the old telecommunications environment where the network was a state

owned infrastructure. Although this has changed in some member states where
the telecom infrastructure is liberalised or privatised, the definition has been
accepted as still valid, the reasoning being that the term "public" does not refer to
ownership but indicates the openness of the infrastructure to the public.
Consequently, any telecommunication infrastructure which is open to all
members of the public on the same basis (and on which ONP obligations are
imposed) is considered as public telecommunications infrastructure deserving
regulatoTy protection.

However in view of the imminent liberalisation of the infrastructure, these
definitions will need revision. The liberalisation regime will give rise to the
emergence of a multitude of network operators not necessarily of the same size
or with the same functions and subsequent obligations. The current regulatory
environment will require substantial modification to handle this situation.

**V**
The present definition of terminal equipment relies on the existence of
harmonised public networks. If this notion disappears, it would be very difficult
to make the distinction between a switch and a terminal since at the termination

point of one network, may be the switching equipment of another network or
service provider. The distinction between terminal equipment and infrastructure
equipment is becoming increasingly difficult.

The interconnection of all infrastructures and the interoperability of services and
applications will become an increasingly important issue, since as already stressed
in the Bangemann report, these two features are essential to the deployment of
the information infrastructure.

It is noteworthy that the ONP Directives, which under the present regime
regulate the relation between the network operator and a service provider refer
to a situation, where the network operator is a monopoly or holds a dominant
position and therefore it is susceptible to impede competition by refusing access

36

**to its network or by adopting technical specifications which do not permit**
**interconnection of the networks or interoperability of** **services.**

**In this liberalised environment, where many more players will provide an ever-**
**wider range of network services, the challenges presented to the establishment of**
**a single harmonised telecommunications terminal market will be considerable .**
**Harmonised standards will offer to all economic operators affected by**
**telecommunications necessary safeguards that will enable them to benefit from**
**the information society. However, under certain circumstances, conformity**
**assessment can be equally well** **based** **upon compliance with the essential**
**requirements in the** **absence** **of TBRs. Thus, the Notified Bodies nominated by**
**the Member States should be encouraged to make use of this option where there**
**is market demand and TBRs have not yet been developed.**

**The future situation** **will** **multiple and competing network providers is believed to**
**lead to the offering of new** **innovative** **services and intelligent use of the**
**subscriber interfaces.** **In order to preserve a multi-vendor Community-wide**
**equipment market "lock-in" or "bundling" of services and equipment has to be**
**avoided. A balance will therefore have to be stuck between regulation and**
**competition. The implementation thereof** **may** **be best assured through the** **future**
**license regime.**

**37**

**•«•** **• f ? » ^ * i ' * * ^** **1** **" j f » - " ' ^ v * *** **T** **[, r]** **? ' • • ' • •** **l*~*"N*»*** **[p]** **r''".''»'''-.** ***** **•** **-»•** **• .** **.** **-** **.** **.** **-** **.** _**,.**_ _**t**_ _**r..,**_ _**.**_ _**-**_ **__.. -, •% • • -** **%** ***^"».»-** **,^»-'"«;-**

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Directive 91/263/EEC established an internal market in the terminal equipment

sector.

Equipment duly type approved in one Member State can be freely
commercialised and connected to the network in the rest of the Community.

The adoption of 11 CTRs by the Commission enabled the achievement of a
considerable harmonisation in the sector and that a further batch of 12 CTRs is

under way is noted with satisfaction.

In view of the recent developments in the sector, some aspects of the
mechanisms of the Directive have been criticised as cumbersome and non

proportionate to the objective aimed at.

The regime would correspond better to the actual needs of the markets if:

        - essential requirements were reduced to the absolute minimum;

       - guidance regarding regulatory aspects were improved.

       - the consultation process were to become more effective.

        - the production of harmonised standards was accelerated;

        - leading to timely availability of relevant standards.

       - conformity assessment procedures were relaxed;

        - true cost-based type approval was a reality.

        - accreditation criteria were fully harmonised.

        - a regulatory framework for radio terminal equipment using
telecommunications allocated spectrum established:

       - effective use of frequency spectrum became horizontal.

        - possibility to create strong economies of scales in this new strategic market
was achieved.

The first recommendation is that, given the extent of the issues identified above,
it is recommended that the two Directives" are fundamentally reviewed and
changed to adapt to the new dynamics of the market place and the future needs
of the European Information Society.

The other three recommendations aim to provide for an immediate improvement
regarding the points addressed above, pending the fundamental review.

**38**

**'** **•««•?•** **.;.-vt.-** **-:** **•-•-** **•** *****

**RECOMMENDATIONS**

**-** **•••••••V-** **<*,v.:**

The extent of the issues identified in this progress report and the changes to the
environment since the Directives were originally drafted, suggests the following
recommendation:

**Recommendation** N° **1:**

It is recommended that the two Directives are fundamentally reviewed and amended as
necessary in order to adapt to the new dynamics of the market place and the needs of **the**
European Information Society over the next ten years. Full account should be taken of

current arid planned horizontal legislation as well as developments in the liberalisation of
the'infrastructure.

In the meantime, some of the more pressing issues can be addressed by the following
shorter term actions.

The following recommendations try to maximise the synergy between the directly
involved players for the purpose of shortening the backlog which unfortunately exists
today. These recommendations aim to achieve improvements which would have
immediate effect.

In the area of standardisation experience has shown that the regulatory requirements,
which have a~Dne-to-one correlation with the essential requirements laid down by both
directives, are not communicated in an effective way to the standardisation
organisations, in particular to ETSI. The current procedures of entrusting the
communication to a chain via the ETSI TBR manager, via an ETSI rapporteur, via a
TRAC correspondent and then reporting back to ETSI Technical Assembly and to the
Commission Services have a great scope for improvement. The considerable delay and
scope for different interpretations would be reduced if a single management
information point in the Commission was informed as soon as any relevant issue is
identified. This observation leads to the following recommendation :

Recommendation N° 2:

For the purpose of improving the guidance to standardisation organisations, in particular
to ETSI, in the area-of regulatory constraints, objectives and [1] requirements, the current
communication chain shall be replaced by a focal management information point within
the Commission Services.;

The Commission Services would, of course, continue to take into account the interests of
all parties, industry, regulators and operators.

- Having regard to the timely development of the Technical Basis for Regulations,
experience has shown that the ETSI procedures, in particular regarding the consensus
making process and the resolution procedures following a public enquiry, cause

39

_**'•••fjB***_ _**•**_

**• 1 I H '** **•'»•*»•<**

**>** **VV.fV^ •••.'• -;•**.** **>.';••** **r** **:** **;-** **> •-•**

**unnecessary delays. It is believed that much time could be saved if, from the beginning of**
**the TBR mandate assignment, every decision at all levels with ETSI were to be made**
**taking due account of the final voting. The whole process should be reviewed, from**
**drafting of scope statements to publication in National Regulations. These aspects are**
**covered by the following recommendation :**

**Recommendation N° 3:**

**Having** **regard** **to the considerable delays imposed** **by** **the current working methods applied**
**in the elaboration of** **CTRs,** **a review should be carried out of the processes** **anï** **decision**
**making at** **all** **levels in the development of the Common Technical Regulations** **should** **be**
**carried out taking into account the need for agreement at the** **final** **voting stage and always**
**limiting the scope strictly to the essential requirements applicable.**

**•** **Observing that considerable time elapses between the adoption of** **the** **draft measures**
**by the ACTE Committee and the publication of the measures in the Official Journal, it**
**is understood that this delay is partly caused by the practice of having the Commission**
**translation services translate, into all Community languages, the technical**
**specifications referred to in the Decisions. The overall process would be significantly**
**speeded up if only the Decision itself were translated.**

**To improve this situation reference is given to recommendation** **N°** **3, which has a direct**
**parallel in the attached draft Council** **Resolution,** **(ref. draft Council Resolution, section**
**"Invites the Commission", paragraph c):**

**Recommendation** **N°** **4:**

**In order to accelerate the timely availability of Commission Decisions, the** **Commission**
**Services should minimise the translation requirements to the Annexes of those decisions,**
**while duly taking into account the legal obligations of the CTRs.**

**40**

**ANNEX** **1** **PROCESS** **FOR** **THE** **ADOPTION** **OF** **CTRS**

The overall process including consultations is shown in the following diagram:

### _The Players & the System_

OFFICIAL JOURNAU

REPORT TO

EP& COUNCIL

EQUIPMENT
ETSI
SUPPLIERS

TECHNICAL
COMMITTEES

NETWORK
OPERATORS]

# **_rzn_**

COMMISSION

TRAC

ACTE

MEMBER STATE

OR EFTA MEMBER

NOTIFIED
BODY

DESIGNATED

LABORATORY

ACTE: The Approvals Committee for Terminal Equipment was set up under the
/ Terminal Equipment Directive to advise the CEC in its drive towards
harmonisation of technical standards for terminal equipment. ACTE is chaired
by a representative of the Commission and comprises of delegations from each
of the Member States. The Committee is of an advisory nature . The opinion
of the Committee can be requested following two different approaches.
Either an opinion of a general nature can be sought, if necessary by taking a
vote. The opinion is recorded by simply reflecting the majority of a vote.
Alternatively, in the particular case of identifying the type of terminals for
which a CTR should be developed, and for the later opinion on the draft
measures proposed by the representatives of the Commission, the opinion
v shall be delivered by the majority as laid down in Article 148 (2) of the Treaty.
TRAC, ETSI and the EFTA countries are invited to send observer delegations
to ACTE. These delegations participate in all parts of ACTE's work except
. the regulatory aspects. The Committee operates under the commitology rules
that apply to all Commission chaired committees. These rules cover such
aspects as voting procedures, representation, quora etc.

ETSI: The European Telecommunications Standards Institute has over 300 members
from all fields of the telecommunications sector and is open for membership to

41

**all countries within the CEPT geographical area (continental Europe). Among**
**other activities, ETSI produces TBRs according to mandates provided by the**
**CEC and based on one or more European Telecommunication Standards**
**(ETSs). ETSI has the responsibility of maintaining the standards referred to in**
**the CTRs.**

**TRAC:** **The Telecommunications Regulations Application Committee provides advice**
**on request from the Commission to establish a technically consistent**
**framework** **for CTRs and to assist with the elaboration of the scope**
**statements for TBRs. The TRAC representatives generally are delegations**
**from each of the Member States and from the EFTA and some other**

**European** **countries** **representing** **regulators** **and** **operators.** **Other**
**responsibilities of TRAC outside the scope of the CTR regime include**
**advising ETSI on the work plan.**

**ADLNB:** **The Association of Designated Laboratories and Notified Bodies is open for**
**membership to all Designated Laboratories (DLs) and Notified Bodies (NBs).**
**The DLs are responsible for testing and the NBs for type approval of**
**telecommunications equipment under the relevant national legislation. The**
**ADLNB provides the forum for the DLs and NBs to** **exchange** **information**
**freely and to discuss issues relating to the implementation of the Conformity**
**Assessment Procedures (see Section 3.1).**

**MSs:** **The governments of** **the** **Member States are responsible for designating the**
**Notified Bodies and Designated** **Laboratories,** **for the proper accreditations**
**and** **for implementing the appropriate national legislation to ensure**
**harmonisation of the Telecommunication Terminal Equipment** **market.** **They**
**must ensure that national testing regimes as implemented by the NBs and DLs**
**are limited to the essential requirements laid down in the CTRs. They are also**
**responsible for market surveillance and ensuring that equipment is only placed**
**on the market if it is appropriately marked.**

**In order to comply** **with** **the international obligations stipulated by GATT, the**
**Commission undertakes that they will carry out the notifications for every CTR**
**ahead of its publication in the Official Journal. Notifications are addressed to the**
**GATT Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade. Notifications are done under**

**the GATT-TBT-Code Article 2.5.2 as the CTRs constitute a technical regulation**
_**"which**_ _**may have a significant effect on trade of the other**_ _**Parties".**_ **It should be**
**noted that CTRs do not fall under the** **GATT-TBT-Article** **4 on** **preparation,**
**adoption and applications of standards.**

**42**

**ANNEX 2** **NUMBERS OF PEOPLE WITH SPECIAL NEEDS IN EUROPE**

**In Europe there are about 100 million elderly people and 50 million who are**
**disabled, according to "The forgotten Millions : Access to telecommunications**
**for people with disabilities" (1994, Office for Official Publications of the**
**European Communities, Luxembourg), where the following impairments are**
**listed:** **'**

**Mobility impaired**

**Wheelchair user** **2,800,000**
**Cannot walk without aid** **45,000,000**

**Hearing** **impaired**

**Profoundly deaf** **1,100,000**
**Hard of Hearing** **80,000,000**

**Visually impaired**

**Blind** **1,100,000**
**Low vision** **11,500,000**

**Speech and language impaired**

**Speech** **2,300,000**
**Language** **5,600,000**
**Dyslexia** **25,000,000**
**Intellectually impaired** **30,000,000**

**Dexterity impaired**

**Cannot use** **fingers** **1,100,000**
**Cannot use one arm** **1,100,000**
**Reduced strength** **22,500,000**
**Reduced co-ordination** **11,500,000**

**All the above impairments** **impact** **on the use of telecommunications services -**
**clearly, disabled people are a significant part of the telecommunications market.**

**43**

**•"f-Si*".** **a»""*'**

**ANNEX 3** **LIST OF** **NOTIFIED BODIES**

**This** **list** **refers to the situation as reported up to 31 October 1995. Updated lists will be**
**published** **from** **time to time in the Official Journal. The up to date situation with respect**
**to** **both** **Notified Bodies** **and** **Designated Laboratories can be confirmed by reference to the**
**appropriate Notified Body.**

**LIST** **OF** **NOTIFIED BODIES**

Responsible for the
following products

**All**

**telecommunications**
**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**
**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**
**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**
**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**
**terminal equipment**
**and**

**satellite earth station**
**equipment**

**44**

Responsible for the
following
procedures/modules

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**
**Production quality**

**assurance**
**Full quality assurance**
**Production quality**

**assurance**
**Full quality assurance**

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**
**Production quality**

**assurance**
**Full quality assurance**
**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**

Annexes '

of the

Directives

Annex I

Annex II

Annex in

Annex IV

Annex HI

Annex IV

Annex I

Annex H

Annex HI

Annex IV

Annex I

Annex II

Annex I

Annex H

Name and address

NATIONAL STANDARDS

AUTHORITY OF IRELAND

Nsai,

Gasnevin

IRL - Dublin 9

ISTITUTOITALIANO DEL
MARCHIO DI QUALITA IMQ
Slsfema CSQ
V. Quintiliano 43
I-20138Milano

DIRECTION GENERALE

DES POSTES ET

TELECOMMUNICATIONS
20 Avenue de Ségur
F - 75700 Paris

ISPETTORATO GENERALE

DELLE

TELECOMUNICAZIONI

IGT

Viale America 201

I-00144 Roma

HOOFDDIRECTIE

TELECONJMUNICATIE EN

POST - DIRECTE

OPERATIONELE ZAKEN

Postbus450
NL - 9700 Al Groningen

Identif
cation

number

**0050**

**0051**

**0165**

**0166**

**0167**

Responsible for the
following products

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**
**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**
**and satellite earth**

**station equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**
**and satellite**

**earth station**

**equipment**
**Tele Terminal**

**Equipment for**
**connection to public**
**analogue**
**network except**
**PABX**

**45**

Responsible for the
following
procedures/modules

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**
**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**
**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**

**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**
**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**

**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**

Name and address

BRITISH APPROVALS

BOARD FOR

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

BABT

Claremont House, 34 Molesey
Road,
Hersham, Walton-on-Thames

Surrey
UK - KT12 4RQ

TELESTYRELSEN

Holsteinsgade 63
DK-2100Kobenhavn

BUNDESAMT FUR

ZULASSUNGEN IN DER

TELEKOMMUNIKATION

BZT

Postfach 10 04 43

D - 66004 Saarbrûcken

DELTA DANSK

ELEKTRONIK, LYS &

AKUSTIK

Venlighedsvej 4
DK - 2970 Horsholm

DIRECCION GENERAL DE

TELECOMUNICACIONES

Plaza de la Cibeles

S/N Palacio de

Comunicaciones

E-28014 Madrid

KEMA NV Kwaliteitssystemen
Postbus 9035

Ultrechseweg310
NL - 6800 Et Arnhem

SWEDISH NATIONAL

TESTING AND RESEARCH

INSTITUTE

SP

Box 857

S-501 15 Boras

Identif
cation

number

**0168**

**0170**

**0188**

**0199**

**0341**

**0344**

**0402**

*****

Annexes

of the

Directives

Annex I

Annex II

Annex HI

Annex IV

Annex I

Annex II

Annex I

Annex II

Annex III

Annex IV

Annex EH

Annex IV

Annex I

Annex II

Annex IH

Annex IV

Annex III

Annex IV

Annex I

Annex II

**V** **[4]** ****''** _**t*l*f'<\:+.7**_ _**[r]**_ _**f.**_

Responsible for the
following products

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**Telefax machines and**

**telefax modems**

**Modems incl. stand**

**alone, printed circuit**
**cards in** **PC** **and** **lap**
**top,** **Computer**
**equipments with tele**
**connections**

**Alarm equipments**
**with tele connections**

**Remote-control-and**

**control equipments**
**with tele**

**connections,**
**Telefax switches,**
**Terminals for the**

**disabled, Number**
**transmitters**

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**All** **;**
**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**46**

Annexes

of the

Directives

Annex HI

Annex IV

Annex II

Annex I

Annex II

Annex HI

Annex IV

Annex HI

Annex IV

Annex I

Annex H

Responsible for the
following
procedures/modules

**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**
**Conformity** **to** **type**

**Type-examination**
**Conformity** **to** **type**
**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**

**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**

**Type-examination**
**Conformity** **to** **type**

Name and address

SIS CERTEFIERING AB

Box 3295

S - 103 66 Stockholm

SEMKOAB

Box 1103

S-164 22Kista

INSTITUTODAS

COMUNICACOES DE

PORTUGAL

ICP

Avenida José Malhoa, Lote

16832

P - lOOOLisboa

SUOMEN

STAND ARDISOIMISLHTTO

SFS

SERTIFIOINTIOSASTO

(FINNISH STANDARDS
ASSOCIATION

SFS - CERTIFICATION

DEPARTMENT

Maistraatinportti 2
FIN - 00240 Helsinki

COMLAB

Comlab

P.O. Box 96

NL - 2007 Kjeller

Idcntif
cation

number

**0412**

**0413**

**0415**

**0416**

**0436**

_**rtrr^r**_ **.** **'»}çr** _**^.T^ff^T**_ _**:«'::*$-**_

_**:•£'•'%•**_

Responsible for the
following products

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**
**and satellite earth**

**station equipment**
**AU**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**All-**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**All**

**telecommunications**

**terminal equipment**

**47**

Responsible for the
following
procedures/modules

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**
**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**
**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**
**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**
**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**

**Production quality**

**assurance**

**Full quality assurance**
**Type-examination**
**Conformity to type**

Annexes

of the

Directives

Annex I

Annex H

Annex HI

Annex IV

Annex I

Annex H*

Annex in

Annex I

Annex n

Annex HI

Annex IV

Annex I

Annex n

Annex in

Annex IV

Annex I

Annexn

Name and address

ÔSTERREICHISCHER

VERBANDFUR

ELEKTROTECHNIK
(ÔVE)
Eschenbachgasse 9
A-1010Wien

INSTITUT BELGE DES

SERVICES POSTAUX ET

DES

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

IBPT

Avenue de l'Astronomie 14

Boîte 21

B - 1030 Bruxelles

SERVICE DE L'ENERGIE

DE L'ETAT

SEE

B.P. 10 ' " "

L - 2010 Luxembourg

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

ADMINISTRATION

CENTRE

TAC

P.O. Box 53

FIN-00211 Helsinki

DANSK STANDARD

Baunegardsvej 73
DK - 2900 Hilierup

NATIONAL

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION (NTC)
60, Kiffisias Avenue

GR- 15125 Maroussi

Identif
cation

number

**0462**

**0468**

**0499**

**0523**

**0527**

**0544**

_**J**_

ANNEX 4 OFFICIAL JOURNAL REFERENCES TO ADOPTED CTRS

Official **Journal Reference**

(OJL8 94/11/EC)

(OJL8 94/12/EC)

(OJL194 94/471/EC)

(OJL194 94/472;EC)

(OJL194 94/470/EC)

(OJL339 94/821/EC)

(OJL329 94/797/EC)

(OJ L329 94/796/EC)

(OJL182 95/290/EC)

GSM Access

GSM Telephony

DECT Access '

DECT Telephony

ONP 2 Mbit/s Leased Line unstructured

ONP 64 Kbit/s Leased Line

ISDN Basic Access, Bridging Measure

ISDN Primary Rate Access, Bridging Measure

ERMES

48

**TBR**

TBR5

TBR9

TBR6

TBR10

TBR12

TBR14

TBR7

###### **ISSN 0254-1475**

#### COM(96) 114 final

## **DOCUMENTS**

##### EN 15 06 Catalogue number : CB-CO-96-127-EN-C ISBN 92-78-01787-6

Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

L-2985 Luxembourg

###### **^°1**