In message <[email protected]>, dated Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Bill Stumpf <[email protected]> writes:
>While I agree that the advice in the TGN was somewhat ambiguous, one >could have easily justified the use of FCC limits, test methods, and >criteria for testing above 1GHz. At the time nothing else was >available. Well, maybe. But there is no guarantee that IF a European regulator queried the product, mention of 'FCC' might do more harm than good. NIH, you know. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Either we are causing global warming, in which case we may be able to stop it, or natural variation is causing it, and we probably can't stop it. You choose! John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - 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
