The R&TTE Directive: A Year of Transition

Directive 1999/5/EC of March 9, 1999, on radio and telecommunications terminal equipment, known as the R&TTE Directive, has been a long time coming. The frenzy of public debate about scope and content during 1997 and 1998 gave way in 1999 to the more-private preparation for implementation in the member states of the European Union (EU). Now, with an effective date of April 8, 2000, in member states, and a deadline of April 7, 2001, for complete compliance of all products, attention has shifted from the well-rehearsed principles to the uncertain practice.

Progress on the transportation of the directive into each member state's law is generally encouraging, but because the mechanisms are different in each country there will certainly be inconsistencies and the timetable will overrun. This should not be taken to mean, however, that the absence of a full legal implementation in a given member state will necessarily prevent certain provisions of the directive from applying directly. For example, while manufacturers are not likely to have difficulties in cases where equipment may be placed on the market on the basis of their own declaration, they may encounter problems where intervention of a notified body is required and none has been appointed by the member state in question.

How the transition this year to full compliance in the EU will be handled by the administrations in the various member states remains to be seen, but it is clear that there will be at least two different scenarios. Equipment that was within the scope of the old TTE directive (98/13/EC) will enjoy a simple, straightforward route to market after April 8, 2000, whereas equipment that was previously subject to national control may have a difficult course to navigate through the minutiae of the new EU regulations.

Scope and Compliance Options

The scope of the R&TTE Directive is much wider than that of its predecessor; the new directive now encompasses all manner of radio terminals and infrastructure equipment that was previously subject to national regulation. Its compliance options range from a simple manufacturer's declaration, which may be used for all terminal equipment intended for fixed networks and all radio equipment complying with harmonized standards, through advice from a notified body, to full quality assurance (see R&TTE Directive Compliance Procedures). The more-involved options are intended primarily for radio terminals using nonharmonized standards.

Transitional Provisions

The R&TTE Directive has transitional provisions that are intended to assist manufacturers in bridging from the old system to the new.

Such provisions have been common throughout the development of an open market for terminal equipment. The usual effect of transitional provisions is to allow any equipment that was previously on the market in accordance with the old regulations to remain on the market and in use indefinitely when new regulations come into effect, provided that the equipment is not modified in any way.

However, the R&TTE Directive's transitional period for placing on the market and putting into service equipment that complies with the TTE Directive or old national rules is strictly time limited. The wording of the R&TTE Directive in regard to these provisions can seem a little ambiguous, with such phrases as "first placed on the market" and "two years after this directive entered into force." However, the harsh reality is that the directive calls for complete compliance to the new regulations by April 7, 2001. After this deadline, all radio and telecommunications terminal equipment must be supplied in full accordance with the new provisions of the R&TTE Directive. There will be no grandfathering, i.e., allowing previously approved products to stay on the market beyond that date.

The R&TTE Directive states that before the 2001 deadline, in order to enjoy the transitional provisions, the full requirements of the TTE Directive and national regulations must be met and all conditions of relevant approvals must be observed, although this statement may seem a little odd since the R&TTE Directive clearly states that the TTE Directive is repealed as of April 8, 2000.

What this means is that continued compliance with the technical standards that held validity under the old regulations is not sufficient. The full compliance mechanism under the TTE Directive, whatever that may be, must be maintained during this year. Clearly what this maintenance requires will vary from one member state to another, but so far the European Commission has made it clear that notified bodies under the TTE Directive must maintain all the necessary services to support manufacturers until April 8, 2001.

Action Required This Year

The very limited transitional provisions of the R&TTE mean that every manufacturer who wishes to supply existing or new equipment beyond April 7, 2001, must take action this year; to carry on as before is simply not an option.

Manufacturers can choose to switch existing products to the new directive at any time during the transitional year, and they do not need to switch over every product at the same time. However, they cannot introduce a new product based on the TTE Directive or national regulations unless all the formalities are completed before April 8, 2000, and they cannot continue to supply a product based on compliance with the TTE Directive or national regulations after April 7, 2001. In other words, manufacturers must use the R&TTE Directive for all new products from April 8, 2000, and for all products, new or not, from April 8, 2001.

Applying the R&TTE Directive principles for new products is relatively straightforward. However, manufacturers can find it a little more confusing to handle transitioning existing products. For existing equipment, there are four basic effects of the regulations that manufacturers need to be aware of.

First, marking applied under the old regulations must be replaced, including the CE mark of the TTE. The symbol of the TTE Directive, sometimes described as a set of crossed hockey sticks, will no longer be valid. The notified body number will also be invalid, unless the notified body has played some role in the conformity assessment process under the R&TTE Directive, which will not typically be the case for fixed network terminals or radio products complying with harmonized standards.

Second, a new declaration of conformity with the essential requirements will be required. This declaration must include a reference to safety and EMC requirements, as well as any specific radio or telecommunications standards. A possible exception to this requirement exists in the case of fixed network equipment, for which, arguably, the extant declarations under the Low Voltage Directive (LVD) and Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) Directive will suffice.

Third, a copy of the relevant declaration of conformity must be supplied with the equipment. The format of the declaration is not prescribed, but it is clear that the information is intended for the user rather than the authorities.

For terminal equipment for fixed networks, this requirement means identifying the public network interfaces for which the equipment is suitable. For radio equipment, there is a more onerous information requirement to mark the packaging with the countries or geographical areas in which the equipment may be used.

In addition to these four general changes, there are some other changes that are specific to either terminal equipment for fixed networks or radio equipment.

Terminal Equipment for Fixed Networks. For terminal equipment for fixed networks, the preferred compliance option is likely to be Annex 2, which described internal production control. This section of the R&TTE calls for the compilation of technical documentation showing conformity of the product with the essential requirements and that will usually contain relevant test reports. In this documentation, existing material about compliance with the LVD and EMC Directive will need to be reviewed in the context of the R&TTE Directive.

An important point to note is that the lower voltage limit that typically constrains application of the LVD is removed in the R&TTE Directive. So, for example, telephones formerly considered outside the scope of the LVD will now be subject to acoustic shock safety requirements, and evidence of compliance with such requirements must appear in the technical documentation.

On the other hand, CTRs, the standards that addressed essential requirements under the TTE Directive, will now be largely superfluous for terminal equipment for fixed networks. The only possible exception to this would be if the European Commission decides that special essential requirements should apply under Article 3.3 of the directive for a product, and where there is a relevant CTR. There are no such cases at this time, and none are anticipated in the transitional period.

Radio Equipment. For radio equipment, the transition will generally be less smooth than for terminal equipment for fixed networks. Where there is no harmonized standard now, the choice of a compliance option is likely to be more difficult and will also entail the choice of a notified body. Again, technical documentation needs to be reviewed in the context of the R&TTE Directive and will include radio essential requirements in addition to the LVD and EMC Directives.

Compliance may mean performing some radio testing, but the European Commission has made it clear that it does not expect notified bodies to demand further testing of parameters already covered by testing for earlier national approvals, even if the notified body receiving the submission was not involved. Compliance with CTRs, where CTRs exist, will give a presumption of conformity, but may be excessive in the sense that CTRs may go beyond the R&TTE concept of essential requirements until such time as they are explicitly reviewed in the light of the new legislation.

The removal of the voltage limit on the LVD also has significance for radio terminals, because it means that handheld devices will be subject to safe radiation limits, providing the need for specific absorption rate (SAR) assessment of mobile handsets, which was missing under the earlier directive.

For radio terminals that do not use the harmonized spectrum, even if harmonized standards have been applied, there is, strictly speaking, an obligation to notify the member states wherein the equipment is to be supplied. In practice, this is unlikely to be necessary where a terminal is already in use, but it may be required if there is a change in authority in a member state or the product is introduced into another member state.

Full Quality Assurance

The quality management system requirements under the two directives are identical. A difference arises only in the technical scope of the activity, which, under the R&TTE Directive, explicitly addresses safety and EMC issues. The R&TTE requirements include the relevant standards for safety and EMC among the technical specifications that are needed. Indeed, safety and EMC standards are the only requirements applied in the case of most terminal equipment intended for use with fixed networks.

Full quality assurance can be thought of as a bonus for absorbing whatever procedures were needed to demonstrate compliance with the LVD and EMC Directive. This new compliance option for safety and EMC allows considerable freedom, particularly in the extent to which the format and content of compliance documentation is prescribed.

Full quality assurance is the only option that avoids the case-by-case involvement of a notified body, even for radio terminals that do not make use of harmonized standards. It also applies to spectrum use that is not harmonized. It is, therefore, likely to be the favored choice of those manufacturers looking to provide wireless equipment.

Other Dimensions to Consider

In reading through the R&TTE Directive and considering its implications, one could easily form the impression that manufacturers should pick one compliance option or another and apply it to every product they manufacture. However, the directive is actually open to more-liberal interpretation, and a certain degree of mixing and matching of options is possible.

With the exception of full quality assurance (Annex 5), the compliance options build on one another. So, Annex 3 (which calls for specific tests identified by a notified body) adds to Annex 2 (which requires internal production control and manufacturer's declaration), and Annex 4 (which describes the technical construction file) adds to Annex 3.

In practice, then, it should be possible to apply the principles of Annex 2 to aspects covered by harmonized standards and then add to this to Annex 3 or Annex 4 for radio or nonharmonized aspects. The procedures of compliance to the respective directives, such as safety and EMC testing, are always chosen by the manufacturer, so a notified body can never insist that a more onerous compliance procedure for EMC or safety be used.

For radio equipment, the R&TTE Directive is not the only technical barrier to be overcome before equipment can be freely circulated and used in the member states. National licensing laws will remain in effect. These laws seek to distinguish between spectrum management, which controls intended emissions and which is a national affair, and the effective use of the spectrum, which is regulated under the R&TTE Directive. Such a distinction is clearly open to a degree of manipulation, and it remains to be seen whether member states will abuse the situation. It is clear that member states are free to impose technical constraints under the terms of national licenses. What they must not do is seek to enforce a type-approval scheme in the guise of such technical constraints.

In addition, there is a requirement to inform the relevant authorities whenever nonharmonized spectrum is intended to be used. There is then a four-week window in which objections can be raised, but the grounds for refusal are restricted to improper use of spectrum, harmful interference, or public health issues.

Transition Requires Action

During this year of transition, manufacturers must take action if they intend to supply existing or new radio or telecommunications terminal equipment beyond April 7, 2001. Because the R&TTE Directive requires changed product marking and user information for all items, it will be easy for authorities to notice if R&TTE Directive provisions have not been conscientiously applied. It is true that the R&TTE Directive requirements are actually unlikely to affect the technical performance of an existing product and that these new requirements may represent a reduction in the overall burden of regulation. However, these two facts should not be used as excuses for not moving to transition products to compliance this year. The bottom line is that if manufacturers do not transition products to the R&TTE Directive, after this year member states will have an excuse for refusing free access to the market for EU products.

Acknowledgment

Barry Cartman left his post as managing director of BABT (Walton-on-Thames, UK) at the end of May 2000 after 18 years in the business of approval and certification of telecommunications terminal equipment. During this period, he has been a major contributor to changes in both UK national and the EU regulatory systems. In anticipation of a fully liberalized terminal equipment market, he helped to establish BABT Product Service (http://www.babtps.com), a joint venture with TÜV Süddeutschland (München, Germany), to provide global support to BABT's clients in the future. He can be contacted at mail@cartman.org.uk.