This post is by John Charters, Radio Product Manager, TRaC
The FCC recently imposed a $10,000.00 fine on a company that was selling a wireless remote control in the USA that didn't have FCC approval. In this case the company wasn't one that was wilfully ignoring the law, but rather they appear to have misunderstood the certification process and had wrongly thought that the product had been certified.
The company had started testing before the product was launched, and the failure to achieve certification was due to a lack of understanding and several staff leaving, but the FCC showed no sympathy. In fact they stated that:
The FCC recently imposed a $10,000.00 fine on a company that was selling a wireless remote control in the USA that didn't have FCC approval. In this case the company wasn't one that was wilfully ignoring the law, but rather they appear to have misunderstood the certification process and had wrongly thought that the product had been certified.
The company had started testing before the product was launched, and the failure to achieve certification was due to a lack of understanding and several staff leaving, but the FCC showed no sympathy. In fact they stated that:
"We do not believe that these circumstances warrant any downward adjustment of the proposed forfeiture amount. It is well established that a violator's lack of knowledge or erroneous beliefs are not a mitigating factor warranting a forfeiture reduction."
Obtaining certification can be confusing, and most companies need advice and support to navigate the maze of different international regulations. When it comes to product certification, however, making mistakes isn't acceptable. In fact the company in this could have been fined even more: up to $16,000 for each violation, or each day of a continuing violation. These fines can amount to a maximum of $112,500 - a huge amount for making a simple mistake.
There are many different online resources about FCC certification, but the safest approach is always to work with a trusted test partner who will guide you through the process and take responsibility for ensuring that every last detail is addressed.
Some previous Certification & Test entries:
* Choosing an EMC test lab
* First it was EN55022, now it's the generic standards requiring >1GHz emission testing
* How the UK helped prevent dangerous explosions
* Why some certifications need factory inspections
* Can Standards really be improved?
* What does a UKAS schedule mean?
* Improve temperature testing by optimising chamber airflow and distribution
* Which standard should I apply?
* Are EMC Standards Really Necessary?
* Standards really do help the economy
* Spot the difference - Why military products need CE marking
* Safety Standards for Military applications
* 9 months to go until testing above 1GHz is a reality - are you ready?
Obtaining certification can be confusing, and most companies need advice and support to navigate the maze of different international regulations. When it comes to product certification, however, making mistakes isn't acceptable. In fact the company in this could have been fined even more: up to $16,000 for each violation, or each day of a continuing violation. These fines can amount to a maximum of $112,500 - a huge amount for making a simple mistake.
There are many different online resources about FCC certification, but the safest approach is always to work with a trusted test partner who will guide you through the process and take responsibility for ensuring that every last detail is addressed.
Some previous Certification & Test entries:
* Choosing an EMC test lab
* First it was EN55022, now it's the generic standards requiring >1GHz emission testing
* How the UK helped prevent dangerous explosions
* Why some certifications need factory inspections
* Can Standards really be improved?
* What does a UKAS schedule mean?
* Improve temperature testing by optimising chamber airflow and distribution
* Which standard should I apply?
* Are EMC Standards Really Necessary?
* Standards really do help the economy
* Spot the difference - Why military products need CE marking
* Safety Standards for Military applications
* 9 months to go until testing above 1GHz is a reality - are you ready?
After obtaining his Bachelor's degree in engineering, Jonathan worked for a number of engineering companies prior to obtaining a teaching role at the University of Hull (England). In 1995 he joined KTL, an internationally renowned test laboratory which then became TRaC, as part of the Digital Group specialising in regulatory requirements for digital telecommunications equipment. During his time at the company he has, among other things, been appointed as Senior Protocol Engineer, and Approvals and Homologation Group Manager. Jonathan has actively participated in various technical working groups for the ZigBee Allianceâ and is currently the ZigBee Qualification Group (ZQG) Lead Technical Editor. 
Steve is Managing Director for the EMC and Safety business of TRaC and has been involved in EMC and product approvals for 19 years. In addition to the day to day running of the business, Steve is actively involved in EMC standardisation both in commercial and defence areas. In addition to being the UK Principal expert on EMC standardisation of Industrial, Scientific and Medical (ISM) products he is also the convenor of CISPR/B/WG1 who has the responsibility of writing the International standard, CISPR 11. Steve wrote the CE marking annex to the UK's defence EMC standard as well as being co-convenor of CENELEC TC210/WG9, responsible for writing a guide on approval of military systems with commercial (CE Marking) requirements.
Joe Lomako MSc is the Business Development Manager of Telecoms and Radio at TRaC. He has been involved in the testing and compliance industry for over 15 years. Prior to joining TRaC Joe specialised in EMC, EMF Exposure and Radio compliance.
Appointed Test Manager in 2007, following three years as Projects Manager at TRaC, having previously worked as Head of Environmental Testing at another UKAS accredited test house. Over 20 years' experience of modelling, testing and measurement in the structural dynamics and seismic fields.
Chris has worked in electrical safety compliance for over 17 years. Having previously worked for BSI, he joined TRaC in 1996, progressing through a number of testing roles before becoming Safety Product Manager in 2006.
Appointed Commercial Manager - Analysis in November 2009. Prior to joining TRaC, he was the Business Development Manager at Onward Technologies, an engineering services company based in India. Graham has spent over 20 years working in the CAD / CAE domain selling both engineering services and engineering systems. 
Stephen Tait joined KTL, an internationally renowned test laboratory which then became TRaC, as part of the Telecom Group specialising in telecommunications product testing for worldwide approvals. Stephen is also responsible for the Telecoms commercial activities within the TRaC group.
Simon Barrowcliff is the Director of the ATEX Notified Body at TRaC. He set up TRaC's Lancashire-based, ATEX business in 2002 and has been heavily involved in EX testing and compliance since then. Simon also runs TRaC's certification schemes for electrical safety under the IECEE CB scheme. He is a chartered electrical engineer with more than 20 years experience of product compliance for electrical and mechanical equipment.
Appointed Managing Director in November 2007. Previously he was Test Facilities Manager for Flight Refuelling, part of the Cobham group, and spent his early career in the Environmental Engineering Department of British Aerospace at Stevenage.
Brendan was appointed Sales Director in August 2009. He joined the group in 2005 as Business Development Manager for environmental test services. Before joining TRaC he spent five years in Application Engineering and Technical Sales roles for automotive test equipment. He studied Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering at Trinity College Dublin.
Leave a comment
What a user pic? Get a Gravatar!