Vic, Are going to publish proceedings of the papers presented. Let me know.
Thanks, Frank. At 06:55 PM 3/16/99 -0500, you wrote: >> According to this site, the MRA process is being delayed. > >The author, David Imeson does not understand the process. The MRA comes in >two flavors: >(1) Acceptance of Test reports >(2) Acceptance of Certificates of Compliance > >Phase 1, acceptance of test reports started on 1 December 1998 >Problem is that the laboratory needs to be accredited these days, where >in the past there was no such requirement. That same problem is there >for American firms. Accreditation is to Guide 25. and asserts technical >capability >to test to FCC and/or CISPR22 requirements. > >Phase 2 is a different kettle of fish. It starts for the USA (I believe) >12 months after >Phase 1 has started (for Canada, 18 months after the start of Phase 1). >The Telecom Certification Bodies require accreditation to Guide 68. Indeed >the US >does insist that a Certification Body must also be a Test Laboratory and >capable of verifying and test reports it gets from laboratories. > >Both in Canada, and in the USA, the requirements for these Certification >bodies are now being formulated. This is the first time that the US and >Canadian goverments give up the carefully held right to Certify. I believe >that technically, they do not relinquish the right to approve, even if for >all practical intents and purposes, anything that is certified, is >approved. Since the EU MRA is only one of a number of MRAs under >development, whatever goes for the countries of the European Union, will go >for Upper Slobovia, if an MRA is concluded with Upper Slobovia. That is >what makes the regulators nervous. > >Anyway, Phase 1 is in operation and Canada and the USA (FCC and Industry >Canada) will accept test reports from "Designated Laboratories" in the EU
