return to : MA Projects | Previous Page 

   

International Strategy

The international strategy has two parts: 1) ensuring U.S. participation in IEC SC77A as the subcommittee rewrites IEC/EN 61000-3-2; and 2) gaining Japanese government and business support for the postponement and redrafting of IEC/EN 61000-3-2. 

Ensuring U.S. Participation in IEC SC77A  

The IT industry needs to participate actively in IEC committees TC77and SC77A as they prepare the revised version of EN 61000-3-2.  This is essential to ensure that the IT industry’s interests are not ignored and that science is used as the basis for designing a cost-efficient standard. 

CHEI members who are appointed by the USNC to TC77 and SC77A need to attend all meetings of relevance.  The IT industry must ensure representation at the following upcoming meetings: 

  • The Advisory Committee on Electromagnetic Compatibility (ACEC) meeting on April 25-27, 2000 in Fontenay aux Roses, France.  (This is a great opportunity to express opinions on IEC 61000-3-2.)

  • The ACEC meeting in September 18, 2000 in Stockholm, Germany.

Additionally, the United States National Committee (USNC), and particularly the U.S. Coordinating Committee on Electromagnetic Compatibility (USCCEMC), should continue to build support among other countries’ national committees and begin to put pressure on the IEC to draft responsible science-based standards and to balance out the utilities versus IT industry representation on IEC/TC77 and IEC/SC77A.  (Exhibit 5 provides a sample letter expressing this view.)  The USNC will also need to balance the various views of U.S. industry in order to achieve the most acceptable outcome.  

An immediate opportunity for the USNC to push the IT industry’s concerns is at the IEC’s Committee of Action meeting on May 25-26, 2000 in Geneva. This committee is responsible for the management of the IEC’s standards work including the creation, dissolution and scopes of the IEC technical committees. Frank K. Kitzantides and Charles Zegers represent the U.S. in the Committee of Action.  Members of CHEI should inform these two of its position.    

The USNC should also consider building a stronger relationship with the IEC in order to tie American standards in more closely with international ones. 

 

Gaining Support of the Japanese Government and Business 

Japan is the second largest exporter of information technology (IT) equipment to the European Union. Therefore, postponing the implementation of EN 61000-3-2 will be of interest to Japan. The following organizations may be able to help the coalition. 

Keidanren. The Japan Federation of Economic Organizations, known as the Keidanren, is a key nationwide trade association in Japan. Its membership includes 1,009 of Japan’s leading corporations (including 63 foreign firms), as well as 119 industry-wide groups representing such major sectors as manufacturing, trade, distribution, finance, and energy. It should be asked if it will help pressure the EU to change its LFE requirements and postpone the implementation of EN 61000-3-2. 

American Electronics Association Japan. The American Electronics Association (AEA) has a branch office in Japan that could be used to solicit the support of the Keidanren.  This office could also be used as a base from which to ask Japanese businesses and government officials to send letters to the DG Enterprise and CENELEC in support of the IT industry position.  

American Chamber of Commerce - Japan. The American Chamber of Commerce - Japan (ACCJ) provides another source of contacts who might be able to solicit the support of the Japanese government and businesses.


Negotiation Strategy

If the above strategy fails, it may be necessary for the U.S. government engage DG Enterprise in negotiations to resolve the issues raised by EN 61000-3-2. The following negotiation strategy should be implemented. The greatest amount of attention will be placed on the analysis stage.  The analysis section describes in detail the interests, options, objective criteria, and best alternatives to negotiated agreement (BATNA) of all the key players and interested parties in the negotiated outcome (see Appendix D). 

ANALYSIS 

Objective:  To convince the European Commission that implementation of EN 61000-3-2 needs to be postponed until the IEC and CENELEC finish rewriting and reviewing the standard. 

Preferred outcome

The European Commission postpones implementation of EN 61000-3-2, adopts revised IEC/CENELEC version of the standard (when finished), and allows an acceptable amount of time for companies to conform to the revised EN 61000-3-2.    

Who Negotiates

Catherine Novelli, Assistant United States Trade Representative for Europe and the Mediterranean and Charles Ludolph, Deputy Secretary for Europe of DOC, will carry out the negotiations for the IT industry.  Their counterpart will be Directorate-General Erkki Liikanen of DG-Enterprise within the European Commission. 

Allies

  • U.S. industry (IT/electronics/electrical) and utilities.

  • European IT companies and associations, particularly EICTA.

  • Japanese government and/or companies (Keidanren). 

Objective criteria

See chart for a detailed account (Appendix D).   

BATNA

File a complaint within the WTO against the EU. 

Negotiation tactics

USTR needs to clearly present its case giving all the facts and evidence available to it. It will be important to describe the costs of EN 61000-3-2, as well as present scientific evidence that the standard is unnecessary. USTR should show openness to a negotiated solution and approach the negotiation as a group effort to fix a common problem and not as one group trying to triumph over another.  Since there may be some truth to the European Union’s theory, the U.S. should work with the EU to negotiate a more acceptable standard; possibly one that adjusts to future changes.

              


 

EXHIBIT 1 

Charles T. Zegers, Secretary

USNC/IEC, TC77A
American National Standards Institute
11 West 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036 

Dear Mr. Zegers: 

The Coalition on Harmonic Emission Issues (CHEI) would like to solicit your support in ensuring that the rewritten International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard 61000-3-2 adequately accounts for the information technology (IT) industry’s interests. This standard is of grave concern to the IT industry because, despite its many flaws, the European Union has adopted it wholesale in its standard EN 61000-3-2 and is requiring that all products comply with it by January 1, 2001. 

IEC/EN 61000-3-2 lacks reproducibility in measurement, its language is ambiguous, and most importantly, there is no scientific evidence or record of the low frequency emission problem the standard is designed to address. For all of these reasons, the IEC recently decided to rewrite the standard.   

CHEI and the electronic/electrical equipment manufacturers need your help in ensuring that the rewritten standard adequately addresses the IT industry’s concerns.    

When IEC Sub-Committee (SC) 77A drafted the original standard, the IT industry had limited to no input; the European utilities industry dominated the process. It is of utmost importance that the USNC and the IT industry have a strong showing within SC77A during the re-drafting process. We need to make sure that the revised IEC/EN 61000-3-2 is based on science and that cost-effective means are prescribed to remedy whatever problem is reflected by this science. 

Members of CHEI would like to meet with you and members of the U.S. Coordinating Committee on Electromagnetic Compatibility (USCCEMC) to discuss our concerns and solicit your input on how to go about participating in the re-drafting process. CHEI is already requesting that members of the IT industry be appointed by the USNC to serve on SC77A and its working groups during the redrafting process.    

By coordinating our efforts with the USNC and USCCEMC we are certain that this standard can be revised to efficiently resolve all of its current problems.   

Thank you for your time and for considering our concerns.  We look forward to meeting with you soon.


EXHIBIT 2

CENELEC

 

Dear Mr./Ms. ___________: 

On January 1, 2001, EN 61000-3-2 is to take full effect. This standard has many flaws.  It lacks reproducibility in measurement, its language is ambiguous, and more importantly, there is no scientific evidence or record that the problems the standard is designed to address actually exist.  There are many other flaws in EN 61000-3-2, so many that the organization that developed the standard, the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), recently decided to rewrite it.   

It simply does not make sense for CENELEC and the European Commission to continue with its intended plans to implement EN 61000-3-2 on January 1, 2001 given the IEC’s decision to re-write its standard. Implementing EN 61000-3-2 will only create a situation where governments and companies expend resources conforming to a standard that is only going to change in a few years when the IEC finishes rewriting IEC 61000-3-2.   

In order to prevent unnecessary expenditures of government and company resources, the European Commission and CENELEC should postpone implementation of EN 61000-3-2 until the IEC completes the new version of 61000-3-2.  Upon completion of the rewritten version, CENELEC should properly review the revised standard within its committees—taking particular care to ensure that the information technology industry and all other interested parties are fairly represented in the review process. Indeed, everyone knows that power suppliers and distributors are over-represented on CENELEC’s low frequency emissions committee.   

The IT industry commends the work CENELEC has done to harmonize standards throughout Europe and wishes to offer its support in preparing standards that facilitate the free flow of goods.   

Sincerely,

 

 


EXHIBIT 3

 

European Commission, DG Enterprise

Rue de la Loi, 200

B-1049 Brussels

Belgium

 

Dear Mr./Ms. ____________: 

We the undersigned trade associations and companies that are involved in the manufacture of electronic/electrical products and components are writing to express our concerns about the negative effects that the EMC Directive will have on the electronics/electrical industry.  Of particular concern is standard EN 61000-3-2, which addresses low frequency emissions created by electronic/electrical products.   

The saga of developing a low frequency emission standard began in International Electrotechnical Commission Committee SC77A, which produced IEC Publication 555.  This Publication specified the permissible harmonic emission levels for household/consumer equipment.  As is normal for the EU standard setting body, CENELEC, this standard was readily adopted by the corresponding CENELEC BTTF TF68-6. Shortly afterwards this standard was listed in the Official Journal. 

More recently this standard was developed further by the IEC Committee and re-designated as Publication 61000-3-2.  The most important change to this standard was to increase its scope to include all electronic/electrical equipment below 16 ampere, which includes information technology equipment (ITE).   

What concerns us, is the fact that the ITE industry was never consulted on this standard and that it was almost immediately adopted by CENELEC, which is comprised of the same Europeans that sit on IEC SC77A—a group that is dominated by the utilities industry and has little to no representation from the ITE industry.  

Fortunately, the protests of the ITE industry did lead to a delay of the original implementation deadline until January 1, 2001.  But the extension did little to solve our concerns. It did nothing to alleviate the increased costs the ITE industry will incur in redesigning products to meet the standard. Nor did it do anything to address the limitations it will place on technological development.  

The fact is that EN/IEC 61000-3-2 is based on concerns over a potential problem rather than sound science. No other place in the world enforces a similar standard. 

The IEC recently decided to rewrite IEC 61000-3-2.  In light of this fact we implore the European Commission to consider postponing the January 1, 2001 implementation date for EN 61000-3-2 until the IEC completes its rewrite. Otherwise, the ITE industry will have to revise its products to conform with EN 61000-3-2, and then a few years later, when the IEC finishes its rewrite, the ITE industry will have to revise its products yet again.    

Additionally, we would like to call your attention to the need for greater ITE participation in the standards development process. As noted above, all of the committees involved in drafting IEC/EN 61000-3-2 are dominated by the power supply manufacturers industry, and as a result, standards have been developed that account solely for the interests of this industry. Indeed, IEC/EN 61000-3-2 does not require the utilities industry to do anything to clean up problems that may contribute to harmonic emissions feedback. The cost of dealing with any potential problems is placed entirely on the electronic/electrical equipment manufacturing industry—despite the fact that the total cost impact of this solution on the eventual user will be much greater than a solution that would require utility companies to clean up their lines.  

The standards development processes in the IEC and the EU should account for all costs in the most efficient manner possible. 

Additional problems are created by the close link between the IEC and CENELEC.  This link means that voluntary IEC standards very quickly become mandatory CENELEC regulations. The result is that the IEC appeals process does not function properly because the IEC is divided between the views of European and non-European member countries. We would be pleased to see the European Union should undertake a careful review of the process by which CENELEC adopts IEC standards.   

Thank you for considering our concerns.  Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any question.

 

Sincerely,

 


EXHIBIT 4

 

Base Letter for Key Members of the U.S. House of Representatives:

 

Dear Representative, 

We the undersigned U.S. trade associations and companies that are involved in the manufacture of electronic/electrical products and components are writing to you to voice our concerns about a European Union low frequency emission standard—European Norm 61000-3-2.  

This standard is designed to prevent electronic equipment, such as computers, from emitting low amounts of electromagnetic interference back onto the power lines from which they get their energy. It is set to take full effect on January 1, 2001, although there is no scientific evidence or record of complaint from European or local energy providing companies to justify such a standard.   

Conforming to this standard is expected to cost the U.S. electronic/electrical industry $25 billion dollars by January 1, 2001. This estimate is based on the fact that, more likely than not, all production facilities will have to be altered since it is not feasible to differentiate production by end-product destination. For certain electronic/electrical products, manufacturing costs are expected to rise from 2 to 1000 percent. In either case, consumer prices will rise, and U.S. exports of electronic/electrical equipment will be hurt.  The information technology industry will be hit particularly hard.   

We are writing to you for two reasons: (1) to inform you of this very serious problem and (2) to request your assistance.  Your ability to create greater awareness of this problem cannot be underestimated.  (Place company name here if going to a specific district representative, otherwise use “We are”) is relying on your support.   

Thank you for your time and for considering our concerns.  If you have any questions please notify _______________. 

 

Sincerely,

 


EXHIBIT 5

 

IEC Committees TC77 and SC77A: 

We the undersigned would like to commend IEC committees TC77 and SC77A for deciding to rewrite IEC 61000-3-2. The standard is fundamentally flawed and would cost the information technology industry billions of dollars, despite the fact that there is no scientific evidence that the standard addresses a real problem.   

Nonetheless, we remain concerned that the re-written standard will have its own flaws if TC77 and SC77A do not change the way they go about drafting standards. Specifically, the committees need to ensure that:  

1.      There is scientific evidence of the need for the standard (e.g., statistically valid field data and technical studies).  

2.      The standard accounts for cost-benefit factors, businesses needs, market impacts, and product feasibility considerations for all industries concerned.   

3.      All affected industry sectors are adequately represented and all industry concerns are adequately addressed during the re-drafting process. 

4.      The re-written standard does not inappropriately address regional standards issues instead of global issues.

 

 Respectfully, 

top

continue to next page