In message <[email protected]>, Derek Walton <[email protected]> writes >I have a client that has constructed a new prototype and would like >their key client in the EU to play with it for a while to provide >feedback. There would only be one sent to a specific customer, and it >would be eventually returned, or disposed of after the eval. > >I believe that getting the CE mark in this situation is not necessary, >but what paperwork should accompany the product and any specific >warnings since this is an evaluation unit?
The explanation of the status of the product should be an integral part of the shipping documentation, so that it cannot go unnoticed or be disregarded, and should preferably be in the language of the country of destination, so it cannot be misunderstood. Beyond that, it depends on which country is involved; Germany, Austria and France would benefit from a very detailed explanation; others might well be satisfied with less. It really can depend very much on how an individual customs official is feeling at the critical moment. Don't forget that even a single non-compliant product is a potential source of significant interference. -- This is my travelling signature, adding no superfluous mass. John M Woodgate - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
