: Elliott Martinson
mailto:emartin...@borgindak.com>>
Sent: Monday, March 6, 2023 6:33 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG<mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [PSES] ROHS Lead Exemption Expires 2024 (e.g. metal film resistors)
Is the general consensus that the exemption will be ex
Is the general consensus that the exemption will be extended or go into effect?
I find it interesting that the truly lead-free resistors often sell for less
than the old ones (probably less demand as BOM changes are slow)
-
This
equ...@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 11:54 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS Exempt Industrial Machinery
External Email: Do NOT reply, click on links, or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe. If you believe this email
may be
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS Exempt Industrial Machinery
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Greetings.
Would a stand-alone industrial cut-off saw (stationary grinding
Greetings.
Would a stand-alone industrial cut-off saw (stationary grinding machine),
5hp to 30hp, intended to cut through metal material, 3-phase 380V, about
the size of a large refrigerator and weighing about 400kg (880 lbs) or
more, be exempt from RoHS?
Wading through all the RoHS documents
gt;
> You do not however declare compliance to RoHS III (it doesn’t exist)
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
> *Charlie Blackham*
>
> *Sulis Consultants Ltd*
>
> *Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317*
>
> *Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ <https://
and Wales, number 05466247
From: John Woodgate
Sent: 16 December 2021 20:19
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS III references on the DoC?
It can't hurt to cite it. There are cases where a citation is not allowed, but
I don't think this is one of them
624317*
*Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ *
Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247
*From:*John Woodgate
*Sent:* 16 December 2021 20:19
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] RoHS III references on the DoC?
It can't hurt to cite it. There are cases where a citation
Consultants Ltd
Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317
Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/
Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247
From: John Woodgate
Sent: 16 December 2021 20:19
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS III references on the DoC?
It can't hurt to cite it. There are cases
It can't hurt to cite it. There are cases where a citation is not
allowed, but I don't think this is one of them.
==
Best wishes John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
Istae nunc
All,
Given that Directive 2011/65/EU has been amended by Directive (EU)
2015/863, is it now necessary to reference the amendment on the Declaration
of Conformity?
This is an amendment to Annex II, and "RoHS III" appears terminology used
by the unwashed masses.
Thoughts?
-Doug
Douglas E
A; May 18-20, 2021
From: Brian Kunde
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 8:47 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] ROHS and DoC
Our motivation for including information on our EU DoCs that may not be
technically required is two-fold; 1. to better inform our cust
ham*
>
> *Sulis Consultants Ltd*
>
> *Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317*
>
> *Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/ <https://sulisconsultants.com/> *
>
> Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247
>
>
>
> *From:* Brian Kunde
> *Sent:* 22 November 2020 05:26
>
st Regards,
-Lauren
-Original Message-
From: Amund Westin
Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2020 4:01 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] ROHS and DoC
For EU compliance, I assume Directive 2011/65/EU is still the correct reference
to use?
I see several parties who is referri
;
>
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> From: Brian Kunde
> Sent: Sunday, 22 November 2020 01:26 PM
> To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [PSES] ROHS and DoC
>
>
>
> Because we provide DoCs translated into over 30 la
Sent: Sunday, 22 November 2020 01:26 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] ROHS and DoC
Because we provide DoCs translated into over 30 languages, we try to avoid text
that has to be translated. Our type of products do not have to comply with
these new regulations until next
Thanks Brian, as simple as possible.
Best regards
Amund
Fra: Brian Kunde
Sendt: 22. november 2020 06:26
Til: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Emne: Re: [PSES] ROHS and DoC
Because we provide DoCs translated into over 30 languages, we try to avoid text
that has to be translated. Our type
sconsultants.com/
> > > Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Amund Westin < am...@westin-emission.no
> > > mailto:am...@westin-emission.no >
> >
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] ROHS and DoC
Because we provide DoCs translated into over 30 languages, we try to avoid text
that has to be translated. Our type of products do not have to comply with
these new regulations until next year, but when we do, we plan to use the same
nomenclature
is_en.htm)
>>
>> Best regards
>> Charlie
>>
>> Charlie Blackham
>> Sulis Consultants Ltd
>> Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317
>> Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/
>> Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247
>>
>> -Original Message---
ee/legis_en.htm)
>
> Best regards
> Charlie
>
> Charlie Blackham
> Sulis Consultants Ltd
> Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317
> Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/
> Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Amund Westin
> Sent:
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] ROHS and DoC
For EU compliance, I assume Directive 2011/65/EU is still the correct reference
to use?
I see several parties who is referring to 2015/863 in their DoC, but isn't that
reference just a replacement for Annex II in 2011/65/EU?
Best regards
Amund
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] ROHS and DoC
For EU compliance, I assume Directive 2011/65/EU is still the correct reference
to use?
I see several parties who is referring to 2015/863 in their DoC, but isn't that
reference just a replacement for Annex II in 2011/65/EU?
Best regards
For EU compliance, I assume Directive 2011/65/EU is still the correct
reference to use?
I see several parties who is referring to 2015/863 in their DoC, but isn't
that reference just a replacement for Annex II in 2011/65/EU?
Best regards
Amund
-
thank you all
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Scott Xe
To: EMC-PSTC
Sent: Fri, May 10, 2019 8:37 am
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS 3 question
Actually there are more than a dozen of amendments in 2018 and 2019 amending
the exemptions of 2011/65/EU . We have to take note of them unless
Actually there are more than a dozen of amendments in 2018 and 2019
amending the exemptions of 2011/65/EU . We have to take note of them
unless the product has a clean compliance.
Regds,
Scott
On Fri, 10 May 2019, 3:49 am John Woodgate, wrote:
> You normally only cite the latest version. As
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS 3 question
The proper way to cite this would be: " Compliant to 2011/65/EU as modified by
2015/863". There is no "/EU" at the end.
On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 1:48 PM John Woodgate
mailto:j...@woodjohn.uk>> wrote:
You normally on
Blackham
Sulis Consultants Ltd
Tel: +44 (0)7946 624317
Web: https://sulisconsultants.com/
Registered in England and Wales, number 05466247
From: 06cee064502d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org
<06cee064502d-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org>
Sent: 09 May 2019 19:12
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject:
Commission-delegated Directives, don't have /EU at the end. 2015/863 is
an amendment to 2011/65/EU, not a 'new version'.
Best wishes
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
The UK is a sovereign state, not a Zollverein state
On
The proper way to cite this would be: " Compliant to 2011/65/EU as modified
by 2015/863". There is no "/EU" at the end.
On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 1:48 PM John Woodgate wrote:
> You normally only cite the latest version. As far as I know, all these
> references end in /EU now.
>
> Best wishes
>
You normally only cite the latest version. As far as I know, all these
references end in /EU now.
Best wishes
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
The UK is a sovereign state, not a Zollverein state
On 2019-05-09 19:12,
Hello group, Our products complies with all versions of RoHS including the
latest one. When it comes to creating Declarations of conformity, do I write
(RoHS) 2011/65/EU+ 2015/863 or do I just write 2015/863? Is there an EU at the
end of the 863? ThanksPeter
-
No, because the piping is not '/fully functional separate products'.
/The enclosure might be considered as such, but an empty enclosure might
not qualify as 'fully functional'.
//
Best wishes
John Woodgate OOO-Own Opinions Only
J M Woodgate and Associates www.woodjohn.uk
Rayleigh, Essex UK
On
Good morning
I have an equipment that is an electrical cabinet with standard breakers,
valves, PLC and pumps and non electrical components like piping and enclosure
that it is placed in the market as an unit
Can be consider according to EU ROHS Q (see below) that the non metallic
parts like
Great, thanks, John!
Scott
From: John Woodgate
Sent: Monday, 4 March 2019 09:05 PM
To: Scott Xe ; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS standard change...
Maybe my explanation was a bit too brief. CENELEC specifies the dow, but the
Commission can assert a different date
this approach? Is there any official guidance to
clarify it?
Regards,
Scott
*From:*John Woodgate
*Sent:* Friday, 1 March 2019 12:43 AM
*To:* EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] RoHS standard change...
Strictly speaking, transition periods are not specified in CENELEC
standards
it?
Regards,
Scott
From: John Woodgate
Sent: Friday, 1 March 2019 12:43 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS standard change...
Strictly speaking, transition periods are not specified in CENELEC
standards, Instead, the mythical animal Docopocoss is specified (Date
*Sent:* 27 February 2019 17:36
*To:* Matthew Wilson ;
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
*Subject:* Re: [PSES] RoHS standard change...
The site you mention has the answer:
/In setting the necessary technical documentation requirements, EN IEC
63000 is *almost identical *to the text of EN 50581, even
Sent: 27 February 2019 17:36
To: Matthew Wilson ;
EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS standard change...
The site you mention has the answer:
In setting the necessary technical documentation requirements, EN IEC 63000 is
almost identical to the text of EN 50581, even if any wording
The site you mention has the answer:
/In setting the necessary technical documentation requirements, EN IEC
63000 is *almost identical *to the text of EN 50581, even if any wording
specific to the EU RoHS Directive has been removed: it aims at
addressing different substance regulations
I see that BSI now state that EN 50581:2012 is marked as Status : Superseded,
Withdrawn
https://shop.bsigroup.com/ProductDetail?pid=0030261478
and states it is replaced by: BS EN IEC 63000:2018, Technical documentation for
the assessment of electrical and electronic products with respect
...@btinternet.com]
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2017 1:14 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS and renewable energy
I agree with your interpretation. I don't think it means that only an inverter
specified by type number by the manufacturer of the PV module is exempt. What
would
.
-Original Message-
From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 6:23 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS and renewable energy
Mr. Woodgate is offering a rational interpretation in the face of an
inconsistent and confused bureaucracy
: Monday, February 20, 2017 1:14 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS and renewable energy
I agree with your interpretation. I don't think it means that only an inverter
specified by type number by the manufacturer of the PV module is exempt. What
would be the point
Opinions Only
<http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk/> www.jmwa.demon.co.uk J M Woodgate and
Associates Rayleigh England
Sylvae in aeternum manent.
From: Regan Arndt [mailto:re...@empowermicro.com]
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2017 9:04 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS and renewable energy
No. Only for panel materials used in the PV film, and is not a system-level
exemption. By definition, substances and materials specified in the RoHS and
REACH directives are considered harmful, so no exclusion for materials in other
stuff.
Can
for the import
authorities?
Brian
From: Regan Arndt [mailto:re...@empowermicro.com]
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 2:05 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS and renewable energy
Greetings everyone,
Regarding the RoHS recast directive; DIRECTIVE 2011/65/EU OF THE EUROPEAN
Greetings everyone,
Regarding the RoHS recast directive; DIRECTIVE 2011/65/EU OF THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 8 June 2011, on the restriction of the use of
certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment (recast) –
see attached.
Article 2 states:
Scope
-
From: Amund Westin [mailto:am...@westin-emission.no]
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 8:01 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] ROHS vs. Safety critical products (SIL, etc)
ROHS mention some exemption of products in the latest directive (Article
2 in 2011/64/EU).
What about so call
ROHS mention some exemption of products in the latest directive (Article
2 in 2011/64/EU).
What about so called "Safety critical products", such as IEC61508
certified products ... are they outside the ROHS scope? I do not think
so, but I have heard rumors that it might be outside, so I want to
ctors: Friedhelm Pickhard, Bernd Hergert, Christopher White
Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Dr. Walter Schirm
Registered Office: Stuttgart; Registration Court: Amtsgericht Stuttgart HRB
19033
From: Mark Schmidt [mailto:markschm...@xrite.com]
Sent: Donnerstag, 21. Juli 2016 22:55
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSE
Hello group,
I am having discussions with my team here in Michigan about what mandatory
marks need to be on a device or component that is currently being developed. It
will be a small measurement device rated 5 VDC @ 1.2 A. The device/component
goes into a larger (ITE) system which will
Message-
From: Brian Oconnell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com]
Sent: 21 November 2014 22:25
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS directive
The boys in our Tijuana factory were asking why so many suppliers'
regulatory/compliance docs were hosed. Could only reply that el
Brian,
You are correct, the reference should be to 2011/65/EU. The old directive is
repealed as per 3 January 2013.
Kind Regards,
Han
On Nov 21, 2014, at 8:43 PM, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com wrote:
The boss questioned the way declarations are written after looking at some
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS directive
The boss questioned the way declarations are written after looking at some
other's documents where their D of C is worded thus:
Directive 2002/95/EC (and its amendments and 2011/65/EU)
Is not the RoHS directive now 2011/65 ? Is the 2002/95 stuff
.
West London
UK
From: Charlie Blackham [mailto:char...@sulisconsultants.com]
Sent: 21 November 2014 19:54
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS directive
Brian
2002 version is obsolete and should not be referenced
( it wasn't a CE marking directive either)
Regards
that only 2011/65/EU be stated.
John Allen
From: John Allen [mailto:john_e_al...@blueyonder.co.uk]
Sent: 21 November 2014 20:18
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS directive
Agreed- see Article 26 “Repeal” of 2011/65/EU, (RoHS 2) which states:
“Directive 2002/95/EC
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS directive
And then I re-read it and see that you could interpret a DoC to mean that
reference to 2002/95/EC means that the declaration is NOT a reference to
2011/65/EU! Most confusing if you don’t know of Art 26 – in which case an
Authority could reject it as out of date
Dear team
I need to perform RoHS 2 XRF and Chemical analysis to a medical equipment
with external charger
The charger has all regulatory approvals for medical.
The Charger manufacturer issued RoHS decleration.
Is this decleration sufficient or I need to perform XRF and Chemical
analysis.
In message 00bd01cf7eb5$53648270$fa2d8750$@cs.com, dated Mon, 2 Jun
2014, Pete Perkins 0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org writes:
Sometimes it seems impossible to get RoHS compliance docs for
misc
small hardware.
Wot common approach is your company taking for such?
Newark
-requ...@ieee.org]
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 3:52 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS for common hardware
Colleagues,
Sometimes it seems impossible to get RoHS compliance docs for misc
small hardware.
Wot common approach is your company taking
Colleagues,
Sometimes it seems impossible to get RoHS compliance docs for misc
small hardware.
Wot common approach is your company taking for such?
:) br, Pete
Peter E Perkins, PE
Principal Product Safety Engineer
PO Box 23427
Tigard, ORe 97281-3427
503/452-1201
Lauren,
Are you able to point to anything published by the Commission on this?
Nick.
On 20 May 2014, at 18:15, Crane, Lauren lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com wrote:
It has recently been interpreted (by Commission and other authorities) as
prohibiting the resale of any in-scope but
July 2019.
Hope that helps
Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor
-Original Message-
From: Nick Williams [mailto:nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 6:53 AM
To: Crane, Lauren
Cc: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS on Hardware
Lauren,
Are you able
In message 003301cf73df$89a38510$9cea8f30$@cs.com, dated Mon, 19 May
2014, Pete Perkins 0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org writes:
It's one thing to have a Directive which depends upon 'good faith' in
some way - which the RoHS program has been depending upon for some
years now - but to
In message d22e43ccd5394f3d829c9f5b5764a...@thhste15d1be4.hs20.net,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014, Charlie Blackham char...@sulisconsultants.com
writes:
Compliance requirements are discussed on
https://www.gov.uk/rohs-compliance-and-guidance
?Due diligence? is the name of the game.
And from
isn't going to have 10kg of homogenous material
Charlie
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: 20 May 2014 12:53
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS on Hardware
In message d22e43ccd5394f3d829c9f5b5764a...@thhste15d1be4.hs20.net
In message 57e1de017da548f694a6d03394b38...@thhste15d1be4.hs20.net,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014, Charlie Blackham char...@sulisconsultants.com
writes:
But these are valid in Britain only, not Europe-wide
Yes, but there is (meant to be) co-ordination between enforcement
bodies.
It's NOT the
What makes even less sense is that RoHS has gone the % per homogeneous material
route, whereas REACH limits are the %age by weight of the complete product.
John C
On 20 May 2014, at 14:08, John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk wrote:
In message
In message c7ef2973-9b5b-45cd-b580-f46862671...@conformance.co.uk,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk
writes:
What makes even less sense is that RoHS has gone the % per homogeneous
material route, whereas REACH limits are the %age by weight of the
complete
One nuance of the RoHS challenge, is its potential impact to the used equipment
market. As recent discussions here have shown, it's hard enough to 'prove'
conformance for products currently in production. Even more so for used
products that will be newly on the EU market (imported). Since it
Yes, equipment imported for own use does not need to be RoHS compliant as you
say. What happens when the importer no longer needs it is an interesting
question, though. It would seem that it can't legally be sold, but it can be
thrown away. This is rather perverse, given that environmental
In message fc549dd1-1f68-46e1-baf5-463482b34...@conformance.co.uk,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk
writes:
Yes, equipment imported for own use does not need to be RoHS compliant
as you say. What happens when the importer no longer needs it is an
interesting
,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 10:48 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS on Hardware
In message fc549dd1-1f68-46e1-baf5-463482b34...@conformance.co.uk,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014
In message
e758c0fcde4a41f2b615646852fab...@blupr03mb119.namprd03.prod.outlook.com
, dated Tue, 20 May 2014, Crane, Lauren lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com
writes:
Of course, RoHS applies to all otherwise-in-scope second-hand products
made at any time that are newly placed on the EU market (from a
On 05/20/14, John Woodgatejmw@JMWA.DEMON.CO.UK wrote:At least it seems that the requirement to discard (dead) fish that shouldn't have been caught is being changed. Maybe someone, thinking no further than line fishing in a river, thought that if thrown back they would come alive again.I believe
In message 29772537.1146244.1400616153990.JavaMail.root@vms170027,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014, Dan Roman, N.C.E. danp...@verizon.net
writes:
I believe the reasoning for the fish is if they allowed fisherman to
keep the
by-catch they would have no incentive to avoid catching what they were
not
Corporation
17095 Via Del Campo
San Diego, CA 92127
858-485-2537 – phone
858-485-3788 – fax (unattended)
From: Mark Schmidt [mailto:mark.schm...@dornerworks.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 1:04 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS on Hardware
Brian,
May I
In message 554dbd57-d1f3-4c4a-bade-09fedbcfe...@conformance.co.uk,
dated Mon, 19 May 2014, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk
writes:
It's a shockingly bad piece of standard writing.
There may be a reason.
Requirements in standards must be objective and measurable, such that
Our internal people working on and maintaining RoHS compliance are having a
very difficult time getting the cooperation we need from our Hardware suppliers
(nuts, bolts, washers, etc.). Our company manufacturers a relatively small
quantity of products so it is impossible for us to purchase
In message
64D32EE8B9CBDD44963ACB076A5F6ABB026954D2@Mailbox-Tech.lecotech.local,
dated Wed, 14 May 2014, Kunde, Brian brian_ku...@lecotc.com writes:
In fact, some of our “specialty hardware” has such a long supply
chain in most cases we cannot even find out who made the part.
As an
@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Reply To: John Woodgate
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS on Hardware
In message
64D32EE8B9CBDD44963ACB076A5F6ABB026954D2@Mailbox-Tech.lecotech.local,
dated Wed, 14 May 2014, Kunde, Brian brian_ku...@lecotc.com writes:
In fact, some of our “specialty hardware” has such a long supply
sites.
Drop me an email if your need supplier suggestions for specific parts.
Just a thought.
Tony
- Original Message -
From: Kunde, Brian
Sent: 05/14/14 02:09 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS on Hardware
Our internal people working on and maintaining RoHS compliance
[mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 6:10 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS on Hardware
Our internal people working on and maintaining RoHS compliance are having a
very difficult time getting the cooperation we need from our Hardware suppliers
(nuts, bolts
- Original Message -
From: Anthony Thomson ton...@europe.com
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 9:40:05 AM
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS on Hardware
Could you purchase parts from the UK or Europe? RoHS is pretty much the 'norm'
in Europe and the small volume
Engineer
Teradata Corporation
17095 Via Del Campo
San Diego, CA 92127
858-485-2537 – phone
858-485-3788 – fax (unattended)
From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 6:10 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORGmailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS
...@lecotc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 3:25 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS on Hardware
Jim,
This is exactly the motivation behind my original email.
How can the trustworthiness of a supplier be evaluated without testing? In a
long supply chain it only takes one buyer
...@dornerworks.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 1:04 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] RoHS on Hardware
Brian,
May I be candid here. A local hardware store in the USA is not going to have
traceability to RoHS compliance. It is highly likely they won’t even know what
it is. Testing
Happy New Year!!!
My boss is looking for help and advice. He is in charge of tracking RoHS,
Reach, County of Origin, etc. status on all components and assemblies our
company deals with. He wonders if there is a Turn-Key software program or
database system that is geared toward tracking this
One suggestion - Silicon Expert, www.siliconexpert.com
On Monday, January 6, 2014 12:23 PM, Kunde, Brian brian_ku...@lecotc.com
wrote:
Happy New Year!!!
My boss is looking for help and advice. He is in charge of tracking RoHS,
Reach, County of Origin, etc. status on all components and
required reports tracking documents.
Brian
From: Kunde, Brian [mailto:brian_ku...@lecotc.com]
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 9:16 AM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS Software Tools?
Happy New Year!!!
My boss is looking for help and advice. He is in charge of tracking RoHS,
Reach
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS Software Tools?
Happy New Year!!!
My boss is looking for help and advice. He is in charge of tracking RoHS,
Reach, County of Origin, etc. status on all components and assemblies our
company deals with. He wonders if there is a Turn-Key
I guess the first place I would look is your currentPDMdatabase vendor (e.g. Oracle, SAP) or your PDM front-end vendor (e.g. Agile) to see if their existing offerings do what you want or can be customized to give you what you want. This would probably be the cleanest approach and keep all your
Group,
I'm trying to find some reputable definitions of industrial monitoring
equipment as it relates to RoHS 2. There is a very brief reference in the
WEEE Directive Annex IB which refers to equipment installed within an
industrial control panel, and that example is much too narrow. The
In message 006601ce7cce$ea8f2540$bfad6fc0$@gmail.com, dated Tue, 9 Jul
2013, Carl Newton emcl...@gmail.com writes:
I?m trying to find some reputable definitions of industrial monitoring
equipment as it relates to RoHS 2.
Does it matter? I'm not all that familiar with RoHS2, but I guess that
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS 2 - Definition of Industrial Monitoring Equipment
Group,
I'm trying to find some reputable definitions of industrial monitoring
equipment as it relates to RoHS 2. There is a very brief reference in the
WEEE Directive Annex IB which refers
What safety standards are scoped?
What EMC standards are scoped?
A stand-alone handheld device is typically not industrial equipment, but
you have until 2017 for monitoring equipment. Your stuff needs to be defined
in Article 2(4).
Brian
-Original Message-
From: emc-p...@ieee.org
. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/pdf/era_study_final_report.pdf
Regards,
Lauren Crane
KLA-Tencor
From: Carl Newton [mailto:emcl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 1:06 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [PSES] RoHS 2 - Definition of Industrial Monitoring Equipment
Group,
I'm
; EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: RE: [PSES] RoHS 2 - Definition of Industrial Monitoring Equipment
I have experience with the question, but no experience getting a good
answer.
I have had the opinion that test and measurement equipment is different from
monitoring and control equipment
Hi All,
Looking for a ROHS/REACH/WEEE consultant preferably from New Jersey/New
York/Pennsylvania area.
Thanks,
SS
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
