Bob is right. Here are some of the difficulties.
The CB Scheme is designed only to show conformity to IEC 950,
or IEC 60950 as it is now named. The issuer can be requested
to include the deviations for some or all of the participating
countries. This will involve country "equivalents" of IEC 60950
like EN 60950.
However, this does not address EMC, health issues, etc. In
the U.S. these are addressed by separate agencies, e.g. FCC,
UL (or other NRTL), OSHA, FDA (laser safety). In other
countries the same agency may require that all these be
addressed when applying for a country "certificate".
So, a CB cert/report is a starter, but will not cover EMC and
health issues, viz. MSDS type data, chemical emissions, etc.
You may also encounter requirements for translated user and/or
service manuals, and in some cases, unique country power rating
labels using the local language and local required contents.
If you are working with an agency 6,000 or more miles away,
and do not have a local representative who speaks the language,
you may need to employ the services of an agent or safety
agency with international ties to act on your behalf.
George Alspaugh
Please respond to "Robert F. Martin ITS/QS-Box"
<rfm%itsqs....@interlock.lexmark.com>
To: "'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'"
<emc-pstc%majordomo.ieee....@interlock.lexmark.com>, "Grasso, Charles
(Chaz)" <grassc%louisville.stortek....@interlock.lexmark.com>,
"'Peter Tarver'" <peter.tarver.ptarver%nt....@interlock.lexmark.com>
cc: (bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark)
bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark
Subject: RE: CB scheme
Russia requires that you obtain a GOST-R mark. There are a few
organizations that can obtain the mark for you. Just having the CB
report will not get you in to the country. You must arrange for the
GOST-R mark, through one of the approved agencies. The process can be
very cumbersome. Having a CB report is useful, but, unfortunately is
only the beginning.
This is one of those examples of the CB scheme not being the 'be-all'
and 'end-all', but it certainly helps. If you would like further
information, please feel free to contact me.
Bob Martin
Sr. Technical Manager - Northeast
Intertek Testing Services
(978)635-8606
fax(978)263-7086
r...@itsqs.com
----------
From: Grasso, Charles (Chaz)
To: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'; 'Peter Tarver'
Subject: RE: CB scheme
List-Post: emc-pstc@listserv.ieee.org
Date: Tuesday, June 23, 1998 9:48AM
I have been told that the Russian Authorities
will only accept a CB report from Nemko. Is this true?
Thank you
Charles Grasso
EMC Engineer
StorageTek
2270 Sth 88th Street
Louisville CO 80027 MS 4262
gra...@louisville.stortek.com
Tel:(303)673-2908
Fax(303)661-7115
Symposium Website URL: http://www.ball.com/aerospace/ieee_emc.html
>----------
>From: Peter Tarver[SMTP:peter.tarver.ptar...@nt.com]
>Reply To: Peter Tarver
>Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 4:28 PM
>To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
>Subject: RE: CB scheme
>
>Gary -
>
>You seem to be doing just fine for your current market. As you market
>expands (you mentioned GOST), however, the CB Scheme Test Report does
offer
>portability to a greater degree than a lesser. Many of the agencies will
>want a sample for a looksee, a few may want to perform minor verification
>tests or testing to accommodate applicable national deviations from the
base
>standard. Overall, you will save time and inventory, but not necessarily
>money, by using the CB Scheme. Without it, you might wind up having to
>provide one or more samples to any of several test houses.
>
>Alternatively, you could also look into what Mutual Recognition Agreements
>your domestic test house has with foreign test houses to see if they meet
>your needs.
>
>Regards,
>
>Peter L. Tarver
>Nortel
>ptar...@nt.com
>
>> ----------
>> From: Gary McInturff[SMTP:gmcintu...@packetengines.com]
>> Sent: Monday, June 22, 1998 9:09 AM
>>
>> If ignorance is bliss I must be a pretty happy guy. I have sort of
>> avoided asking this question because I seem to be the only guy that
>> doesn't fully understand the answer to this question.
>> Currently I use the standard US/Canadian private label mark and
>> one from Germany to meet the appropriate safety requirements. Our
>> principle market are US, Europe, and Japan.
>> I can get both the US and European investigations done
>> concurrently with the same product samples, and I have yet to have a
>> problem getting the equipment accepted by either the clients or the
>> countries in which they reside.
>> Given that what are the advantages I am not seeing in a CB
>> scheme report?
>> On the face of it a CB scheme report seems to be the proverbial
>> one-stop-shopping solution we would all like to see. But as I check into
>> it further a CB report doesn't seem to really provide a final answer.
>> Each agency still has the prerogative of requesting samples although
>> they may accept the test data from the CB approved lab. (UL for example
>> indicated they probably would want a sample along with the report).
>> Whether the issue is testing or product evaluation having to have some
>> agency put me in their queue for approval seems to be a big step
>> backwards.
>> Currently, having recognized private label marks for Europe and the US
>> has yet to cause a hitch in the normal customer base shipments.
>> GOST and NOM are on the horizon and I suppose that because I
>> have to send them products anyway because they are not part of the EC
>> and want their own marks it suggests that a CB report might be
>> beneficial in this case in speeding up the approval but overall I don't
>> see a significant benefit to a CB scheme instead of my current approach.
>> Am I missing the obvious? Am I making my life more difficult and
>> expensive than it should be?
>>
>
