hello reuben, Thanks for the info.
Frank. At 09:19 AM 7/4/97 +1100, you wrote: >Those who attended the Austel Seminar in April 97 got an insight into the >thinking behind the new Act & Regulatory Regime. A Draft of TAG 3/7 was >provided. > >As well as new Regime we have SMA & Austel merging from 1 July hence there >is a hiatus and rulings will be delayed. > >Pre 1 July 97 the Permit Holder had to be an Australian domiciled entity so >Austel could more easily legally enforce regulations. Permit Holder could be >the overseas manufacturers local office, his Disributor or an independent firm. > >Post 1 July 97 the same applies but read "Supplier" instead of Permit Holder >for new "Applications" > >In both cases the Permit Holder/Supplier must maintain a Compliance Folder >which will be audited. Now Penalties have been dramatically increased for >wilful breaches and incopetence or ignorance is no excuse. > >The Regulations are silent on Variations to existing Permits. It would be >wise to wait for a Ruling once ACA settle down[see above]. > >I see 3 key changes > > a. Self Declaration supported by a Statement of Compliance from an >Approved Lab. > > b. Creation of new Standards moves to Industry Groups under ACA >supervision/reserve power. > > c. The Supplier must ensure goods are C-tick labelled Comply or > "Not-Comply or Permit Number. > >Hope this helps > > > >At 08:01 AM 3/07/97 -0700, you wrote: >>I see people starting to take notice of this on TREG so I'd like to ask >>a question to all of you. >> >> >>Reading the stuff on the ACA www page there is reference to exiting >>AUSTEL permits. The notes seem to imply that there will be an >>(approximate) 18 month period of transition where all existing PTC's >>will have to transition to the new labeling requirements. This is >>unless they significantly modify the equipment (when it will apply >>immediately). >> >>Now the new requirements mandate the declarer/labeler (in PTC language >>equivalent to the "approval holder") to be the manufacturer (if >>manufacture occurs in Australia) or the importer. This is different to >>the PTC rules which simply require a legal entity. >> >>It therefore appears that non-Australian companies that have legally >>obtained AUSTEL PTC's through non-trading daughter entities may now have >>to transition the ownership of the "PTC/right to label & declare" to >>other parties (such as the distributor) within the time frame. Does >>anyone else read the instrument like this or does it allow the existing >>PTC holder to self declare in variance to the rules for new equipment. >>It doesn't seem clear to me which applies in this particular situation. >> >>Does anyone out there have a view on this? >> >>I look forward to seeing more questions on this interesting legislation >> >>JohnP. >> >> >> >> >> >R. Medding & Associates Consulting Engineers Melbourne Australia >[email protected] Phone (Intnl): 61 3 95328848 Fax (Intnl): 61 3 9532 8849 > > >
