Nope; however, my understanding is that the list in Appendix G2 is
only a 'sample' of what may/should be done, and that the manufacturer
has some leeway regarding which specific tests should be performed.
Tania Grant, Octel Communications Corporation
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: FCC retest?
Author: [email protected] at P_Internet_Mail
List-Post: [email protected]
Date: 12/10/96 9:14 AM
There is no mention of 68.302 in the list below. Any opinions on
whether it should be done for a CC?
--Jack Marshall
Bay Networks, Inc.
[email protected] wrote:
>
> FCC Form 730, Application Guide for registering equipment to FCC Part
> 68 Rules, in its Appendix G, describes a continuous compliance program
> that the manufacturer must sign to show that his equipment continuous
> to comply with the Rules. This is not a new rule, but existed as long
> as I can remember. The following tests must be performed every
> six months:
> 68.304 leakage current
> 68.306 hazardous voltage
> 68.308 signal power limitations
> 68.310 longitudinal balance
> 68.312 on-hook impedance
> 68.314 billing protection
> 68.316 hearing aid compatibility
> 68.318 other, such as 1.544 Mbps, line seizure, etc.
>
> FCC Part 15 does not prescribe mandatory re-tests every six months;
> however, the manufacturer has "to maintain compliance". How you do
> that is left up in the air. Many manufacturers habitually retest
> every new configuration and change in the product. If such changes
> occur only every few years, I think it would be prudent to retest
> the product at least once a year to make sure that it still complies.
>
> Tania Grant, Octel Communications Corporation
> [email protected]
>
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
> Subject: FCC retest?
> Author: [email protected] at P_Internet_Mail
> Date: 12/9/96 3:08 PM
>
> Hello,
>
> I was just informed that my new company has to retest their telco equipment
for
> part 68 and 15 every six months.
>
> Is this a new requirement? They said they have been doing it for two years.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jay D. Hall
> [email protected]
>
> December 9, 1996
> 3:08 pm MDT
