Hello Sam, I am not familiar with this 'Grantee Change' procedure that you described below. My experience with the FCC in the situation of an OEM of a radio product by second company is that the company OEMing the product (Company B) files 'a new application' with the FCC (albeit an abbreviated application) referencing the test data and report previously submitted by the Company holding the equipment grant (Company A) and indicating that both products are the same and would continue to be so. Company B submits new photos of the product, a new label with label location diagram showing new FCC ID, any change in product model and new company name and the application must be accompanied by an attestation statement. For the new FCC ID, Company B would need to file for a grantee code if it does not already have one.
The 'Grantee Change' procedure that you described below seems to be the one that is applicable in the case of a 'transfer of control' or 'a sale' of the old company (Company A) to a new company (Company B). I would believe that a similar OEM situation (Company B OEMing Company A's product) in Europe would require that Company B goes the TCF route, using the test report and product data of Company A. Annex V is for Companies with a qualified Quality Assurance System in place. >-----Original Message----- >From: Wismer, Sam [mailto:wisme...@lxe.com] >Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 11:40 AM >To: EMC Forum (E-mail) >Subject: RTTE Radio Verification > > > >Group, >Interesting discussion on FCC Verification of OEM ITE equipment. > >I have another twist that includes radio and the EU. > >Company A has a 2.4GHz radio device that they have self >declared to the RTTE >Directive in accordance with Annex V of the directive. > >Company B, with no internationally recognized quality system >in place and >has not been assessed by a Notified Body, wishes to OEM the >radio device >and to assume the existing approvals. In effect appear to the >world as the >manufacturer. In the USA that can be done via a Grantee >change with the >FCC. With that, company B assumes the FCC approval that company A has >obtained and now enjoys it's own FCC identity. This allows >company B to >file permissive change applications with no involvement by >Company A. This >also used to be the case in the EU before the RTTE Directive. >However, is >it still possible between company A, that used Annex V to declare >compliance, and company B who wishes to assume that approval >even if company >B does not have the quality system in place that is required >by Annex V, >which the approval is declared to? > > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Sam Wismer >RF Approvals Engineer >LXE, Inc. >(770) 447-4224 Ext. 3654 > >Visit Our Website at: >http://www.lxe.com > > > >------------------------------------------- >This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety >Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. > >To cancel your subscription, send mail to: > majord...@ieee.org >with the single line: > unsubscribe emc-pstc > >For help, send mail to the list administrators: > Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com > Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org > >For policy questions, send mail to: > Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org > > ------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to: majord...@ieee.org with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Jim Bacher: jim_bac...@mail.monarch.com Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
