The regulations are pretty daft...these things are not defined.
One must show that they meet those criteria by due dilligence.

Say I make a piece of electronic equipment which has a 1.5v battery and runs effectively at DC..eg no fast clock frquency...no coils or contacs that open suddenly and could spark thus generating RF.
I could show the design to be incapable of generating a disturbance. I should back this up by a brief technical file as part of the design documentation.

Similarly if I have a circuit board with an 8Mhz processor I could take it to a test house and have some tests done...all future products using this board could be assumed to have similar levels of emissions.

Susceptibility is a different and totaly stupid situation...
You can define your own failure criteria...!!

So on a chemical dosing unit you could say....
If the unit stops working this is OK...
It is only a 'failure' if the dosing pump fails in a state where it runs continuously....
Even then if you are pumping a safe chemical from a small contaianer you could decide that this is not a failure...
You could define 'failure' as ..say..the device exploding or catching on fire.

A further complication is that some equipmwnt should only be tested as part of the 'Installation' if it is permanently wired...thus it is virtually impossible to do emission testing.

I hope this helps

Del

I have to say, it is pretty daft (do I hear an echo there?), but it is a regulation, what do you expect?

If I read it correctly, it means a secondary user of a frequency band, in which it is not allowed to disturb the primary users, and cannot complain (successfully) about disturbance from them. Plenty of them around, and you can find frequency utility charts shoving their relations.

mit freundliche gruesse