My company's undergoing an investigation on obtaining the C-Tick mark too. Something else I found out about the Declaration of Conformity is that the original must remain at an Australian address, preferably the address of the person signing the DoC.
-------------------------------------- List-Post: [email protected] Date: 1/31/97 6:39 AM To: Steve Chin From: Mark Briggs Randall, I was under the impression that the statement of compliance/Declaration Of Conformity for Australia had to be held and signed by a Registered Australian Company. This would mean that if you were not registered as an Australian company your importer would do this for you. They would be more likely to sign the declaration if your test results were from an Accredited body. From what I have read there is no compulsory requirement for EMC testing to be performed accredited test lab for non-telecommunications equipment, but a product's compliance is less likely to be questioned if its test results come from a NATA-recognised lab. Mark At 02:57 PM 1/30/97 PST, you wrote: > > > ---------- >From: Flinders, Randall >To: EMFLDS-L Mailing List >Subject: Australia EMC test requirements >Date: Tuesday, January 28, 1997 3:11PM > >Hello group, > >I am hoping someone may have some information for me on this issue. After >reviewing the Australia EMC requirements, I have to say that I could not >locate anything that said that testing MUST be performed by a NATA >accredited test facility. The most I could come up with was that Austel >states that ideally the data should be from an accredited facility. Is it >required that I take my testing to an accredited lab, or can I do it on my >own OATS site? Any input would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks, > > >Randall T. Flinders >EMC Test Engineer >Emulex Corporation >[email protected] > > ------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------ Received: by sledgehammer.com with SMTP;31 Jan 1997 06:37:12 -0800 Received: from smtp1.cerf.net by oz.sledgehammer.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id GAA11555; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:38:00 -0800 Received: from ruebert.ieee.org (ruebert.ieee.org [199.172.136.3]) by smtp1.cerf.net (8.8.5/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA09932 for <[email protected]>; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:00:32 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by ruebert.ieee.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id AAA20414 for emc-pstc-list; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 00:34:42 -0500 (EST) List-Post: [email protected] Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:29:22 -0800 Message-Id: <[email protected]> X-Sender: [email protected] X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: <[email protected]>, [email protected] From: Mark Briggs <[email protected]> Subject: Re: FW: Australia EMC test requirements Sender: [email protected] Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Mark Briggs <[email protected]> X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients <[email protected]> X-Listname: emc-pstc X-List-Description: Product Safety Tech. Committee, EMC Society X-Info: Help requests to [email protected] X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to [email protected] X-Moderator-Address: [email protected]
