Hi All, Thank you all for your expert advice as usual. I feel significantly better now that I know that we are all being subjected to the same requirements.
Brief Summary: 1. The CB Scheme requires all its participant labs and agencies to "update" their CB reports every 3 years, change or no change. 2. Original CB Test Reports can be subjected to three (3) amendments only, after which a new CB Test Report and associate CB Test Certificate shall be issued. 3. Corrections due to misprint, changes of names or addresses are not considered to be amendments. Best Regards, Brent Taira > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:owner-emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf > Of Ned Devine > Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 6:57 AM > To: emc-p...@ieee.org > Subject: RE: Actual requirement or money making scheme? > > > > Hi, > > We discussed this at the US National Committee of the IECEE on 19 April > 2000. There is some confusion on the interpretation of this requirement. > It was explained, that an amendment is NOT a correction or a change to a > part number. An amendment is when new data/pages are added. > > Using Brent's example of adding an alternate plastic. If no tests are > necessary, then it would not be an amendment. If there was > testing, then it > would be an amendment. > > Ned Devine > Entela, Inc. > Program Manager III > Phone 616 248 9671 > Fax 616 574 9752 > e-mail ndev...@entela.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew Meehan [mailto:mee...@i-kk.co.jp] > Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 1:35 AM > To: emc-p...@ieee.org > Subject: RE: Actual requirement or money making scheme? > > > > Hi Brent, > > > Subject: Actual requirement or money making scheme? > > Definitely an actual requirement. (about the rest of your subject: No > comment). > > Decision: > Original CB Test Reports can be subjected to three (3) amendments only, > after > which a new CB Test Report and associate CB Test Certificate shall be > issued. > Explanatory notes: > Experience shows that by making more than three amendments to a CB > Test Report the technical features of the initial product becomes such > that the tracking against the Master File can be lost. > > To get your very own copy go to: > http://www2.imq.it/ctldecisions/collect.htm > choose sheet 291 (bottom right) > > Regards, > Matt > > > Subject: Actual requirement or money making scheme? > > > > > > > > Hello wise colleagues - > > > > Just recently, we have decided to add some alternate components > to one of > > our CB Reports and was informed by a particular agency that we needed to > > have a new CB Report issued since we already have 3 updates to the > existing > > report. > > > > In the past, we were able to add an alternate plastic to the CB > report and > > just pay for an addendum (few thousand...I know, I am already getting > ripped > > off). But, now to add an alternate component and pay for a > full CB Report > > and Certificate?! That does not make sense. After talking to > the project > > engineer, he indicated that this is the direction of his > organization and > > this interpretation will be implemented across the board with all member > > agencies. We only have a few products with few changes. I > would hate to > > work for a computer manufacturer who changes the disk drive manufacturer > and > > model numbers like it was last month's model. Oh yeah, it was last > month's > > model. > > > > All I know is that this change in policy will push me well over budget > this > > year. Without turning this into a bashing session of any particular > agency, > > can anyone direct me to an agency that has a more relaxed interpretation > of > > the "CB Update" requirement? > > > > Thank you very much for your time and your expert advice. > > > > Best Regards, > > Brent Taira > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety > > Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > > > > To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > > majord...@ieee.org > > with the single line: > > unsubscribe emc-pstc > > > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > > Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com > > Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org > > > > For policy questions, send mail to: > > Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety > Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > > To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > majord...@ieee.org > with the single line: > unsubscribe emc-pstc > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com > Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org > > For policy questions, send mail to: > Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org > > > ------------------------------------------- > This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety > Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > > To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > majord...@ieee.org > with the single line: > unsubscribe emc-pstc > > For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com > Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org > > For policy questions, send mail to: > Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org > > > ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
