COCIR (a European medical device trade organization) requested twelve RoHS2 exemptions between September 2011 and March 2012 for Annex IV and all of them were granted as they are all noted in the below listing of 16 exemptions that were granted.  COCIR produced a really helpful resource guide on the RoHS 2 Directive and if you would like to see the original exemptions list that COCIR requested go to section 8 of the document. 

The exemptions that were added without an exemption date could be changed in the future so you should keep an eye out for changes to the exemptions list in Annex IV of the RoHS 2 Directive.  Also, the Directive could have changes elsewhere such as the list of materials that are banned, most definitely will expand over time, in Annex II, among other changes.  The best place to check for these changes is at the Europa Website for the RoHS 2 Directive under the heading RoHS 2 and then go down one more heading to Secondary Legislation on RoHS 2 which then has a sub-heading of Exemptions which currently has 3 listing in this section.  One for the Commission Delegated Directive 2012/50/EU (the 1^st added exemption), for the Commission Delegated Directive 2012/51/EU (the 2^nd added exemption), and lastly the 16 Commission Delegated Directives 2014/1/EU to 2014/16/EU which is what the rest of this post is all about.  See the below for the 16 Delegated Directives and links to each one of them.  A description of each exemption is noted in the below listings for your ease of use here.

Walter Jager, of ECD Compliance, provided some clarification about exemptions without an exemption date.  He advised me the following:

“It’s also important to note that the RoHS 2 Annex IV exemptions that have no expiry date are valid for up to 7 years. For example, for most category 8 medical devices (ie. the medical devices that must be RoHS compliant by July 22, 2014) these Annex IV exemptions will automatically expire on 22 July 2021 . A manufacturer or industry association may apply to extend the exemption if there is still justification, but the application needs to be made at least 18 months before the expiry date. For category 8 in-vitro devices the default expiry is 22 July 2023 (22 July 2024 for category 9 industrial monitoring and control equipment). The recent Annex IV exemptions generally have fixed expiry dates.”

Commision Delegated Directive 2014/1/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead as an alloying element for bearings and wear surfaces in medical equipment exposed to ionising radiation  

Commision Delegated Directive 2014/2/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for cadmium in phosphor coatings in image intensifiers for X-ray images until 31 December 2019 and in spare parts for X-ray systems placed on the EU market before 1 January 2020

Commision Delegated Directive 2014/3/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead acetate marker for use in stereotactic head frames for use with CT (Computed Tomography) and MRI and in positioning systems for gamma beam and particle therapy equipment

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/4/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead enabling vacuum tight connections between aluminium and steel in X-ray image intensifiers 

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/5/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead in solders on printed circuit boards, termination coatings of electrical and electronic components and coatings of printed circuit boards, solders for connecting wires and cables, solders connecting transducers and sensors that are used durably at a temperature below – 20 °C under normal operating and storage conditions

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/6/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead in the surface coatings of pin connector systems requiring nonmagnetic connectors which are used durably at a temperature below – 20 °C under normal operating and storage conditions

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/7/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead in solders, termination coatings of electrical and electronic components and printed circuit boards, connections of electrical wires, shields and enclosed connectors which are used (a) in magnetic fields within the sphere of 1 m radius around the isocentre of the magnet in medical magnetic resonance imaging equipment, including patient monitors designed to be used within this sphere, or (b) in magnetic fields within 1 m distance from the external surfaces of cyclotron magnets, magnets for beam transport and beam direction control applied for particle therapy

 Commission Delegated Directive 2014/8/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead in solders for mounting cadmium telluride and cadmium zinc telluride digital array detectors to printed circuit boards

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/9/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead and cadmium in metallic bonds creating superconducting magnetic circuits in MRI, SQUID, NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) or FTMS (Fourier Transform Mass Spectrometer) detectors

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/10/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead in alloys, as a superconductor or thermal conductor, used in cryo-cooler cold heads and/or in cryo-cooled cold probes and/or in cryo-cooled equipotential bonding systems, in medical devices (category  8) and/or in industrial monitoring and control instruments 

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/11/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for hexavalent chromium in alkali dispensers used to create photocathodes in X-ray image intensifiers until 31 December 2019 and in spare parts for X-ray systems placed on the EU market before 1 January 2020 

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/12/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead in solders on printed circuit boards of detectors and data acquisition units for Positron Emission Tomographs which are integrated into Magnetic Resonance Imaging equipment 

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/13/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead in solders on populated printed circuit boards used in Directive 93/42/EEC class IIa and IIb mobile medical devices other than portable emergency defibrillators

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/14/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for 3,5 mg mercury per lamp in single capped compact fluorescent lamps for general lighting purposes < 30 W with a lifetime equal to or above 20000 h

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/15/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead, cadmium and hexavalent chromium in reused spare parts, recovered from medical devices placed on the market before 22 July 2014 and used in category 8 equipment placed on the market before 22 July 2021, provided that reuse takes place in auditable closed-loop business-to-business return systems, and that the reuse of parts is notified to the consumer

Commission Delegated Directive 2014/16/EU amending…Directive 2011/65/EU

an exemption for lead as an activator in the fluorescent powder of discharge lamps when used for extracorporeal photopheresis lamps containing BSP (BaSi₂O₅  Pb) phosphors

I (as a medical device consultant, US TAG member of IEC SC 62A & 62D & Convener of SC62D JWG9 {IEC/ISO/AAMI/CENELEC 80601-2-58} and a past Notified Body Auditor) am really pleased to see the extremely hard work that has gone into this document and also in the value that it will pass on to all the stakeholders.  There are many stakeholders that were involved in this process including Notified Bodies, NB-MED EN 62304:2006 issues team (Thank you for your hard work.), NB-MED, COCIR (European Coordination Committee of the Radiological, Electromedical and Healthcare IT Industry), Manufacturers, OEMs, Standards Developers for EN & IEC & other national standards bodies, Test Houses, Consultants, other countries regulatory bodies (i.e. FDA, Health Canada, etc.) and more.  By use of so many different stakeholders that submitted some of these and other questions this document has a much more consistent view on the implementation issues with the complexity of the topic of medical device software.  

This document is good for learning about your specific implementation issue(s) or if you have the time I would highly recommend reading the whole document, as this will help you understand the intricacies of some of the situations of implementing EN 62304 with respect to the Medical Devices Directives (I’m sure there are more issues but a good portion have been captured by this first version).  I believe this document would be of great help to implement similar guidance documents for many other national medical device regulatory agencies around the world for IEC 62304:2006 (or their national version of the standard).

The Table of Contents gives a good glimpse into the realm of the issues covered in this document and covers the following topics.  I also provide a further glimpse into the document by summarizing some of the specific issues within those sections (these are the indents furthest to the right):

• Introduction (background of the purpose, rationale, the main team members, and how to provide more feedback on the document)
• Abbreviations (Section 1)
• Questions and Answers (Section 2 – Heading of sections 2.1 – 2.7)
• Scope of EN 62304 (Section 2.1)
• Goes into various different scenarios and discusses the implication and implementation issues around these scenarios: such as SAAS, Embedded software including FPGA’s (a hotly contested issue) with single chip computers, Hardware Description Languages specifying FPGAs, Stand alone software, Medical apps, Excel macros, Open & closed systems, Internet or cloud based, Server based systems, Network devices.  In addition to this list of scenarios this section also goes into questions about certification; is Validation included in this standard & if not where does it get covered; what are the expectation of the Notified Bodies with regard to the standard; can you use only part of the standard; why do class A software to EN 62304; what is IEC 82304 about (software only products); among other questions.
• Placing Software as Medical Device on the Market (Section 2.2)
• Explain ‘placing medical device (in this case software or software {s/w} as part of a system) on the market’ in EU if EN 62304 is sufficient, by itself to do this; can I change my intended use and avoid these EU guidelines and regulations; Conformity Assessment routes of the MDD; other countries acceptance / requirement of the standard; can you sign-off on documents electronically; classification of software as a MEDICAL DEVICE; how do Notified Bodies (NB’s) confirm compliance to the standard; among other questions.
• Life-cycle Processes (Section 2.3)
• If s/w development is an outsourced activity what does NB expect; does this std have an equivalent expectation to requirements such as those addressed in FDA Part 11 (Electronic Records & Signatures) in the US; details on the review process at the end of each iteration when updated versions are available during the design and development of the software; does the std require a specific development process; how split up the requirements/responsibilities of the std between the manufacturer and s/w sub-contractor; how do the maintenance activities in the std relate to ISO 20000/ITIL; what are the artifacts (documents) required by EN 62304; at what level does the Problem Resolution Process apply; does software refactoring require a formal change request; what to include in the Technical File to show compliance with EN 62304; how can agile processes be EN 62304 compliant; among other questions.
• Risk Assessment and Risk Management (Section 2.4)
• How deal with risk control measures; when & why can the safety class of a s/w SYSTEM be reduced; how use ISO 14971 with EN 62304; explain Hazard, Cause, Sequence of Events in the context of software; when should we expect additional Software Hazard Analysis guidance within EN 62304; among other questions.
• Classification and Segregation (Section 2.5)
• What is segregation and how do I prove effective; use of a specific class(es) of s/w using COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) what criteria used; how does severity under intended use relate to s/w safety class; is s/w class optional; can you downgrade the classification of the system without a fully hardware protective system; does the compiler need to be classified under EN 62304; how are development platforms & tools related to s/w safety class; relation between Risk Analysis at System level & S/W Safety Classes; explain how the 3 safety classification in the std differ from the FDA’s 3 levels; correlate IEC 61508 SIL levels to EN 62304 safety classifications; s/w classification is a real issue with big implications; among other questions.
• Specifications, testing and tools (Section 2.6)
• I’m a manufacturer of medical devices – how do I document my requirements and tests; web-based medical s/w – does the std have specific requirements related to digital cert’s, (http or https) server requirements; in regard to the std how deal with risk analysis and functional specs; appropriate level of granularity of requirements as design input, design description; which (if any) of the tracing requirements are meant to be bi-directional; questions around deployment of the s/w; what is required of open source code from the std; among other questions.
• SOUP (Software of Unknown Provenance) and Legacy Software (Section 2.7)
• How assess & qualify suppliers of SOUP s/w, when the s/w hasn’t been developed for incorporating into a medical device; what testing & documentation does EN 62304 require for SOUP to meet the std; s/w that is either stand-alone or embedded which was designed prior to publication of EN 62304 but still being placed on the market (legacy product) – what needs to be done; if legacy s/w needs significant change, what processes & documents are required to achieve &/or maintain compliance with EN 62304 and when are changes considered significant;
• References (No Section Number – just after Section 2.7)
• Software Problem Resolution Process (Annex 1)
• Helpful diagram – There are several entry points to the problem resolution process, both during development and maintenance of the software (refer to question 2.3.12).
• SOUP selection, assessment & qualification (Annex 2)
• Flowchart & text to explain an example
• Traceability (Annex 3)
• The 3 flowcharts show an overview of the dependencies which need to be traced according to EN 62304 for all 3 classes – refer to note in bottom left corner of page to know which class the flowcharts apply to (refer to question 2.6.7).
• Position paper on direct diagnosis (COCIR, 2011) (Annex 4)
• As the different stakeholders may interpret this term differently, COCIR and EUROM VI wanted to share their understanding of the term “direct diagnosis”. (Refer to question 2.5.13)

Click on the weblink to see the initial request for questions that we posted on our website 26 May 2012.  To see the posting please go to http://www.eisnersafety.com/do-you-know-how-to-use-en62304-med-dvc-sw-life-cycle-as-implemented-under-themdd-aimdd-doc/

A request for practical questions and issues has just been launched and the invitation letter for FAQ on EN62304 (a short 2 page document) and publication of the FAQ is expected by end of September 2012.  The request document is asking for your questions and any proposed answers (if you have those too) to be submitted by the end of May 2012 so you better hop on the bandwagon and get those off to the e-mail address of FAQ62304@VDE.com.  I think some of these dates may slip a little but that is not confirmed yet.  If I get confirmation of any changes in dates I will advise as soon as I can.

This may sound familiar as this is a similar process to the FAQ document that was issued in Jan/Feb of this year for the EN 60601-1, 3rd ed. Implementation FAQ document.

On October 1, 2011 the DRAFT “FAQ related to Implementation of EN 60601-1:2006 Clarification of open issues” was issued and this DRAFT document is being sent to NB-MED for commenting on the document.  NB-MED is also known as TEAM NB.  This organization is the European Association of Notified Bodies for Medical Devices which covers the MDD (93/42/EEC), AIMDD (90/385/EEC), and IVDD (98/79/EC).  This group publishes guidances that are agreed on by the Medical Device Directives (93/42/EEC, 90/385/EEC, and 98/79/EC) Notified Bodies. Once all the responses are agreed to it is anticipated that the document will be released as an NB-MED guidance document.

The History of this DRAFT document is restated below.  Note that any “click here” links are not live in the below text but are live in the actual DRAFT document.

History

During spring 2011, it was realized that the use of EN 60601-1 and its many family members in demonstrating compliance with the relevant and applicable requirements of the European medical device regulatory framework was not too trivial. While relevant guidance on the matter had been published at the CENELEC website as a Q&A document (click here), some Notified Bodies were giving advice that was felt to be not in line with that guidance. On other occasions, questions were raised that were not covered in the guidance.

So, it was concluded that the situation for electrical equipment in medical practice was not totally clear and that additional guidance would be useful. Further contact with the chair of the NB-MED confirmed this desirability, and a small group of experts was established. This group developed an enquiry asking for “practical issues in the implementation”, that was sent to many stakeholders in June 2011(see Annex 1). Also at the international level of IEC the request was distributed (62A/769/INF).

The response to the request was beyond expectation and the small team of experts, initially consisting of three, was expanded with Dr. Klaus Neuder of DKE (Frankfurt, Germany).

End of July 2011, the work on digesting the issues submitted until then started and it took until end of September 2011 until all material had been thoroughly discussed and answers formulated to the questions that were raised. In some cases, the questions were slightly amended to make them a little more general, and a few additional “connecting” questions were developed by the team.

It is believed that the answers, developed in close team cooperation, present a fair response to the issues brought forward and that they can be used as a reference for all stakeholders.

Now it is time for the NB-MED to scrutinize the proposed responses and see if they are also acceptable to all members of NB-MED. The NB-MED comments are kindly awaited by the end of October 2011, at the same e-mail address that was used for the initial submission of the issues: 60601Ed3.NBMED.issues@gmail.com, using the form supplied together with this document.

Happy reading!

The 60601-1 Issues Team:

Dr. Wolfgang Leetz, Dr. Peter Linders Dr. Klaus Neuder Mr. Martin Schneeberg

I would like to also thank Martin Schneeberg & Peter Linders for allowing me to share this with all my clients and website visitors.

Implementation of EN IEC 60601-1 3rd edition

Request for Issues

on the use of the standard for CE-conformity purposes

When the transition period was defined for EN IEC 60601-1:2006 (replacing the 1988 version with its two amendments), several questions arose. These questions were included in a FAQ document that was posted at the CENELEC web site (click here) to give all users the same interpretation[1]: (click here).

The transition period, after which only the 2006 edition will be giving presumption of conformity with the relevant Essential Requirements of the Medical Device Directive (93/42/EC), is now well underway. As an increasing number of manufacturers are implementing this version of the standard, more questions come up. In particular this is the case in conversations between manufacturers and involved authorities or Notified Bodies considering CE-conformity purposes.

In an attempt to support these discussions, and to harmonize responses, we are looking for specific matters that have arisen and that may have wider relevance. Together with regulatory experts, we will seek answers to those matters that reflect a consensus opinion of the Medical Notified Bodies. Clearly, this is not a request for technical matters, e.g., for required test conditions, but rather unclear situation. A few examples of such matters are given in the annex.

If you know of such matters, or even have experienced some yourselves, please share these. If you have reached agreement on these matters or you have proposals for the same, and wish to share: these are also very welcome. As indicated, the matters will be compiled and given to experts for sound advice, followed by scrutiny from NB-MED experts, resulting in the best available recommendations for the matters indicated. This advice will be made publicly available.

Please submit your contributions to: 60601Ed3.NBMED.issues@gmail.com. Note that not all contributions may receive individual responses. We will start work with material submitted by 30 June 2011, yet contributions after that date remain welcome. We expect first results by 30 September.

Thank you for your consideration and valuable contributions.

Martin Schneeberg (TÜV SÜD PRODUCT SERVICE, member of UK 811.1, IEC TC62A, WG14, MT28, A1PMT, IECEE RM TF)

Wolfgang Leetz (Siemens AG, Healthcare Sector, chair of DKE Division 8 (electro medical equipment, electro acoustic, ultrasound, laser), chair of COCIR Standardization Policy Focus Group)

Peter Linders (Philips Healthcare, chair of CENELEC TC 62, chair of COCIR Technical and Regulatory Affairs Committee, member of IEC/TC 62 CAG, A1PMT)

Annex – Examples of questions sought

Q1. Valid EC Design-Examination certificate period vs. DOCOPOCOSS: 2012-06-01:
Example: Suppose an MDD class IIB or III electrical medical equipment was placed on the EEA in 2009. It has a signed EC Design-Examination Certificate by a NB based on 2Ed EN 60601-1, valid until 2014-01-01 (five years).

Question: Is this product affected by the DOCOPOCOSS related to EN 60601-1:1990 (+ am1 + am2), June 1st 2012? Keep in mind that a valid EC certificate has been issued by a NB which is valid 5 years up to 2014.

Q2. Future totally new particular standards:
For a specific MEE does not exist a specific particular standard related to 2Ed EN 60601-1. However, for this specific MEE a totally new particular standard related to the 3Ed EN 60601-1:2006 is work in progress. This question is relevant at least for:
– 60601-2-63: for dental extra-oral x-ray equipment,
– 60601-2-64: light ion accelerators,
– 60601-2-65: for dental intra-oral x-ray equipment,
– 60601-2-66: hearing aids and hearing systems

Officially such MEE’s shall fulfil the complete 3Ed EN 60601-1:2006 plus the relevant particular standard 60601-2-XY at the date 2012-06-01, unless there is a specific transition period for the applicable particular standard. Usually no specific transition period for the totally new particular standards are defined in the OJ, therefore, 2012-06-01 will apply.

Is there any guidance beyond the general advice to discuss specific problems related to the application of these new standards with the NB and using Risk Management?

Can 3 years transition period for the EN 60601-2-XY be claimed starting from publishing the EN version of the particular standard?

Q3. Is ZLG paper 3.5 A1 legally binding for EU NB’s and MEE manufacturers:
The ZLG-paper 3.5 A1 addresses a valid concern extremely clear: “The missing new assessment by the manufacturer after the end of the “doc” or the missing knowledge about the existing of new harmonized standards or scientific knowhow are substantial NON-conformities. If these NON-conformities will not be adequate corrected, the certificates have to be suspended or withdrawn.”
Is this paper legally binding? Am I allowed to ignore it? In clear words: If the “doc” is over and I have not objective evidence about the new 3Ed EN 60601-1:2006 requirements in a point-by-point protocol format, is my NB forced to suspend or withdraw my CE-certificate?

[1] Collateral standards under the MDD & AIMD: CLC/TC 62 questions and answers on the EN 60601-series of standards in relation to the MDD and AIMD