Hey keep this technical will you?? Charles Grasso EMC Engineer StorageTek Tel:(303)673-2908 Fax(303)661-7115
>---------- >From: [email protected][SMTP:[email protected]] >Sent: Monday, July 14, 1997 11:51 AM >To: [email protected]; Alan Hudson +44 (0)1383-821921 >Cc: [email protected] >Subject: Re[2]: alternate test sites > > Regarding your "cute footnote": > > The same could be stated for certain husbands. > > I suggest that you show greater consideration to people; it has been > many many years since polygamy was outlawed by Mormons. > > Tania Grant, Octel Communications Corporation > A non-Mormon. > > >______________________________ Reply Separator >_________________________________ >Subject: Re: alternate test sites >Author: "Alan Hudson +44 (0)1383-821921" <[email protected]> at >P_Internet_Mail >Date: 7/14/97 10:12 AM > > >If I remember correctly, it's the Competent Body - the person who approves >(hopefully!) and signs the Technical Construction File - who must be >resident in the EU. > >Mind you, this is probably a moot point, now that the EU/USA have signed a >Mutual Recognition Agreement, I assume the USA can now test/approve their >own gear themselves. > >-- >Alan > >Mormons can have more than one wife. This is called polygamy. >Christians can have only one wife. This is called monotony. > > >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: alternate test sites >> Date: Friday, July 11, 1997 10:55AM >> >> >> Greetings, >> >> These 2 questions may seem rather naive, but I never really had to >> address >> them. Any help by those who have direct experience would be greatly >> appreciated. >> >> 1. I heard the statement "The EU does not accept emissions data from a >> semi-anechoic chamber (SAC)" Since I deal mostly with ITE, I looked in >> EN55022-1987, para. 10.3.3 and see no mention of the use of anything but >> an >> OATS. The question is "Does all testing to EN55022 have to be performed >> at >> an OATS or can I use a SAC which has a "good" normalized site >> attenuation >> (<+/- 4 dB)?" It would seem to me that if you are self certifying, you >> would want to be confident the equipment passes with enough margin that >> it >> would pass anywhere. If you felt confident using a current probe and a >> scope, then go ahead and self-certify. >> >> 2. My second question deals with the famous person who signs test >> reports >> and is the responsible person (i.e. jail time) should the data be found >> to >> be bogus. Again, assume we are self certifying ITE equipment. I was >> told >> that the responsible person must be a resident of the EU. A company in >> the >> States could not self certify and place the CE mark on equipment with >> "only" the head of quality signature, assuming the head of quality lives >> in >> Anytown USA. I also heard that less than reputable companies in the >> States >> find "some European guy" who will sign anything and can vanish if the >> need >> arises. >> >> Some of this sounds like urban legend to me, but I appreciate any >> comments >> you may have. >> >> Thanks in advance... >> >> Jim Nadolny >> AMP Inc. >> jim [email protected] > > >
