S
Our ME products do comply and details (of how) have been added to our TF (where else to put it?), including a signed DoC to the RoHS 2 Directive (i.e. our CE mark now covers both Directives).
However, my NB is currently arguing (as of now, due to the 22nd July deadline) that they should indeed assess Technical Files (TF) to RoHS 2. I have been counter arguing along the Eucomed lines, even to the extent that in my correspondence I have put:
?It maybe as a NB that you are infringing EU law by taking it upon yourselves to enact legislation (Directive 2011/65/EU) where you have no authority under NANDO registration or the member state?s regulative body.?
(I am still awaiting a reply on that one and also the fact they also may be in breach of our [conformity] contract).
Confusingly in an initial reply from our NB they have themselves indicated:
There is no Notified Body involvement in the directive as it is a manufacturer self-declare directive.
It is basically the principle I am arguing (again as per Eucomed) and the fact that NBs will be after more money to extend their review of TFs to include RoHS 2.
I would be interested on anybody else?s further take on this and/or similar experience directly with a NB.
Steve
However, my NB is currently arguing (as of now, due to the 22nd July deadline) that they should indeed assess Technical Files (TF) to RoHS 2. I have been counter arguing along the Eucomed lines, even to the extent that in my correspondence I have put:

?It maybe as a NB that you are infringing EU law by taking it upon yourselves to enact legislation (Directive 2011/65/EU) where you have no authority under NANDO registration or the member state?s regulative body.?
(I am still awaiting a reply on that one and also the fact they also may be in breach of our [conformity] contract).
Confusingly in an initial reply from our NB they have themselves indicated:
There is no Notified Body involvement in the directive as it is a manufacturer self-declare directive.
It is basically the principle I am arguing (again as per Eucomed) and the fact that NBs will be after more money to extend their review of TFs to include RoHS 2.
I would be interested on anybody else?s further take on this and/or similar experience directly with a NB.
Steve