Effective last month, Brazilian National Certification Bodies (NCBs) and CB Testing Laboratories (CBTLs) have been suspended from the IECEE CB Scheme.  This is the first time that the IECEE has suspended a member.

The suspension is attributed to additional accreditation requirements of Brazil’s regulatory authority, the National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology (INMETRO).  INMETRO requires that CB test reports and certificates come from a testing laboratory accredited by INMETRO or an Accreditation Body that is a signatory of the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation Mutual Recognition Agreement (ILAC MRA).  This requirement is not in line with the requirements of the IECEE, which is based on a Peer Assessment System between members of the IECEE CB Scheme.

The suspension prevents IECEE members from accepting test certificates and test reports from Brazil.

The IECEE CB Scheme is an international cooperation between 65 NCBs with hundreds of testing laboratories located in 50 participating countries. It is based on the principal of mutual recognition of test results for obtaining national safety certification of electrical equipment and components.

According to the IECEE Executive Secretary, Pierre de Ruvo, the suspension will be cancelled and full membership reinstated as soon as an agreement is reached with INMETRO and/or the Brazilian Committee of Electricity, Electronics, Lighting and Telecommunication (COBEI).

Laboratories – Learn how to become a CBTL of a U.S.-based NCB.

Manufacturers – Get a CB Scheme test report or test certificate.

Register for a free webinar: Using the CB Scheme to Access the World Marketplace.

For Medical Electrical Equipment product safety compliance in Canada, Health Canada currently recognizes both the second edition of IEC 60601-1, published in 1988, and the third edition, published in 2005. In October, 2008, Health Canada published a notice indicating that until June 1, 2012, conformity to the second edition of IEC 60601-1 and its related collateral and particular standards would be accepted. After June 1, 2012, conformity to the third edition would be required.

New editions of particular standards (specific to a particular device type and designated as IEC 60601-2-X) harmonized with the third edition of IEC 60601-1 have, in many cases, not yet been published, or have been published only recently, making a full transition to the entire family by the June 1, 2012 deadline impossible.

To address this, on March 22, Health Canada issued Additional Guidance on Transition from the Second to the Third Editions of the IEC 60601 Family of Standards on Health Canada’s List of Recognized Standards.  It states:

• If there is not a particular standard that is directly applicable to the device as of June 1, 2012, it should conform to IEC 60601-1 3rd edition and its applicable collateral standards (that is, IEC 60601-1-X).
• If there is a particular standard that is directly applicable to the device and the version that harmonizes with IEC 60601-1 3rd edition was published by IEC before June 1, 2009, then the device should conform to IEC 60601-1 3rd edition and its applicable collateral standards in addition to this particular standard.
• If there is a particular standard that is directly applicable to the device and the version that harmonizes with IEC 60601-1 3rd edition was published by IEC after June 1, 2009, a three year transition period from the date of publication by IEC will apply. During this transition, Health Canada will accept conformity to both editions and related collateral standards.

These transition rules will not be applied retroactively. If the manufacturer currently holds a license for a device that was tested according to IEC 60601-1 2nd edition, you do not need to submit additional data, unless there is a significant change to the product as defined in the Guidance for the Interpretation of Significant Change of a Medical Device.

Keep in mind that provincial or territorial electrical safety requirements are separate and distinct from the requirements of the Health Canada regulations. For further information regarding these requirements, contact the applicable regulatory authorities. A listing of some of these authorities is available here.

The Health Canada website should be consulted for the most current List of Recognized Standards.

For the 3rd edition implementation schedule for the United States, see this Compliance Today post.

Later this month, MET is hosting a free Medical Equipment Regulatory Compliance Seminar in Texas. It features presentations on 60601-1 for product safety and EMC compliance, as well as CE marking.

For testing and certification to the second or third edition of 60601-1, contact MET Labs.

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has issued draft revisions to six Knowledge Database (KDB) publications for RF exposure and SAR compliance.

They are:

KDB Publication 447498 – General RF Exposure Policies for Equipment Authorization

• Draft revision
• Existing publication

KDB Publication 941225 – SAR Evaluation Considerations for LTE Devices

• Draft revision
• Existing publication

KDB Publication 865664 – SAR Measurement Requirements, Compliance Reporting and Documentation for 100 MHz – 6 GHz

• Draft revision
• Existing publication

KDB Publication 616217 – SAR Evaluation Considerations for Laptop, Notebook, Netbook and Tablet Computers

• Draft revision
• Existing publication

KDB Publication 648474 – SAR Evaluation Considerations for Handsets with Multiple Transmitters and Antennas

• Draft revision
• Existing publication

KDB Publication 643646 – RF Exposure Evaluation Considerations for Occupational Push-to-Talk Two-Way Radios

• Draft revision
• Existing publication

The public may post a comment on these proposed revisions through June 1, 2012.

Other RF Exposure KDBs
Remaining RF exposure KDB publications that do not have draft revisions are:

• KDB Publication 248227 – Additional SAR Measurement Procedures that Specifically Address 802.11 a/b/g Devices
• KDB Publication 615223 – SAR Requirements and Procedures for 802.16e/WiMax Devices
• KDB Publication 450824 – SAR Probe Calibration and System Verification Considerations for Measurements from 150 MHz to 3 GHz
• KDB Publication 680106 – Rules Regulating Short Distance Wireless Inductive Coupled Charging Pads or Charging Devices

Questions about SAR compliance? A SAR testing expert will be available next week at 2012 International CTIA Wireless at the MET Labs exhibit.

Get more information and pricing on SAR testing and certification.

Although this year marks the 20th anniversary of the ENERGY STAR program, lighting was a bit late to the party.  It wasn’t until 15 years ago that residential light fixtures got their first ENERGY STAR specification, and 13 years ago that compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) did.

ENERGY STAR lighting continues to evolve.  Following are some updates.

Luminaires
The Luminaires Version 1.1 specification became effective April 1, 2012.  It combines the scope of the Solid-State Lighting (SSL) Version 1.3 specification and the Residential Light Fixtures Version 4.2 specification.

Only those light fixture models that have been third-party certified as meeting the Luminaires V1.1 requirements now appear on the ENERGY STAR qualified product list. Fixtures qualified under the previous specifications will not be “grandfathered in” to this new specification.

There are nearly 500 qualified luminaires from more than 50 manufacturers, covering over 20 different product types.

Lamps
The new ENERGY STAR Lamps V1.0 specification is still being developed.  This new specification will merge the scope of the Compact Fluorescent Lamps V4.3 and Integral LED Lamps V1.4 specifications into one technology-neutral specification. 

For draft 1 of the Lamps specification, EPA received 175 pages of comments. These comments are being considered for draft 2, which is anticipated in the next several months.

Certification Bodies
Using the new third party certification (3PC) process, in 2011 Certification Bodies like MET Labs certified 191 CFLs, 357 LED lamps, 166 luminaires, and 1,462 light strings.  In 2012, the number of lighting products certified is expected to be even higher.

According to EPA research, CB processing time ranges from 24 hours to two weeks, depending on a certification body’s work load and the completeness of a product submission.

Once a CB certifies a product meets an ENERGY STAR specification, it sends the data to EPA to be uploaded to the qualified products lists (QPLs).  Lists are currently updated weekly for bulbs and twice a month for fixtures (around the first and the middle of the month). By the end of 2012, all product lists should be updated on a daily basis.

Upcoming Events
The next ENERGY STAR products partner meeting is October 22–24, 2012 in St. Paul, Minnesota.  This is for lighting, as well as appliance and electronics partners and other stakeholders.

EPA Program Manager for ENERGY STAR Eamon Monahan will be speaking at MET Labs’ Annual Global Product Compliance Seminar & Crab Feast  in September.

Find out how to get ENERGY STAR testing or certification body services.

The recent delay in the high-profile new product launch of the Raspberry Pi has reminded electronics manufacturers of a simple truth: Compliance sometimes means exceeding regulatory requirements due to buyer demands.

The iPhone-size Pi is a $25 mini PC that is intended to teach students about programming.  Its maker, the UK-based Raspberry Pi Foundation, had been operating under the assumption that this type of engineering sample product could be sold in the UK without a CE mark.  After all, the rival ARM-based Beagleboard development kit is sold under the same terms without a CE mark, as are the majority of similar prototyping platforms.

The rub here is that the Pi has proved wildly popular, making its distributors nervous about lawsuits.  Distribution partners element14/PremierFarnell and RS Components insisted that the device receive a CE mark to indicate compliance with electronic emissions guidelines.  Their judgment was seconded by the UK Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), which said the Pi did in fact need to carry the CE marking.

Last week, to everyone’s relief, the Pi passed EMC testing without requiring any hardware modifications.  The testing was conducted at Panasonic’s facility in South Wales.

The device passed radiated and conducted emissions and immunity tests in a variety of configurations, as well as electrostatic discharge (ESD) testing.  In the lab for all of last week, the Pi is now also reportedly compliant with requirements for United States’ FCC, Australia’s C-Tick, and Canada’s Technical Acceptance Certificate.

Find out more about testing requirements and cost and lead time for CE Marking.

Following are recent and near future changes to electrical product regulatory requirements in South Korea.

Effective January 1, 2012, the Korean Communications Commission (KCC) requires radiated emission measurements at the limit, above 1GHz, by the highest internal source of the device and also conducted disturbance testing for devices with telecommunication ports. The limit is the same as CISPR 22:2006.

Effective July 1, 2012, the Ministry of Knowledge Economy (MKE) will assume responsibility for regulating safety of electrical products sold in Korea, a role currently carried out by KCC.  After July 1, KCC will only regulate IT/RF/Telecom products.

Effective January 1, 2013, KCC plans to expand its existing SAR requirements for mobile phones to include all radio equipment that is used within 20 cm of the human body. This harmonizes the Korean SAR requirements with FCC and other international standard requirements. Low powered radio devices (below 20mW) are exempt from this new requirement.

See other blog posts on changes in Korea electrical product regulations.

Learn how to gain certification for the Korean market using a Conformity Assessment Body (CAB) under Phase I of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Mutual Recognition Agreement for Conformity Assessment of Telecommunications Equipment (APEC Tel MRA).

Participate in a free International EMC Homologation webinar on April 10, 2012.

As detailed in Compliance Today before, the Australia C-Tick and A-Tick regulatory compliance markings will be phased out, replaced by the existing Regulatory Compliance Mark (RCM). 

RCM Labeling
The RCM mark will be the only mark to indicate compliance with the Australian Communications and Media Authority’s (ACMA) regulatory arrangements for telecommunications, radio, EMC and electromagnetic energy (EME). 

The new arrangement will commence July 1, 2012, in concert with the implementation of the new Electrical Equipment Safety System (EESS).  Many regulatory observers believe the start date may slip to later in the year.

All new devices that are physically labeled for the first time from July 1, 2012 will need to be labeled with the RCM. The use of the C-Tick and A-Tick marks on all legacy products will be phased out by June 30, 2015. Devices that have already been labeled with the C-Tick or A-Tick mark but not sold (e.g. stock products) prior to the end of the transition period may continue to be offered for sale beyond that date.

EESS Safety
The EESS is not a national requirement; it was created by state and territory electrical equipment safety legislation, and is not yet adopted across all of Australia and New Zealand.

The EESS marks a fundamental change to the electrical safety landscape for products sold in Australia and New Zealand. In-scope electrical equipment suppliers will be required to register their details on a national database and must make a declaration that all the equipment they sell meets relevant standards and is electrically safe. Evidence of compliance is required and is graded, based on risk.

Risk-based classifications of equipment are:

• Level 1 = low risk
• Level 2 = medium risk
• Level 3 = high risk

Level 2 and level 3 equipment are defined in AS/NZS 4417.2.  All other types of in-scope electrical equipment are level 1.

In-scope is defined as all new electrical and electronic equipment that is designed or marketed as suitable for household or personal use whose voltage is greater than 50 V AC RMS or 120V ripple-free DC, and less than 1000V AC RMS or 1500V ripple-free DC.

For more information, see ACMA’s extensive FAQ on the changes (.docx).

Get a quote for testing and certification to Australia and New Zealand standards.

Get educated on how to gain access to multiple markets – including Australia and New Zealand – by joining a free International EMC Homologation webinar on April 10, 2012.

The National Electrical Code (NEC) – or NFPA 70 – was updated in 2011, as part of its 3-year change cycle.  The NEC is published by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and is commonly adopted by U.S. state or local political subdivision, and enforced by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ).

Many NEC requirements refer to “listed” or “labeled” devices, as defined in Article 100 of the NEC.  The NRTL (Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories) program accredits those organizations – like MET Labs – that, by whose labeling, the manufacturer indicates compliance with appropriate standards or performance in a specified manner.

Following are some of the key changes that were incorporated into the 2011 edition:

• 110.24 Electrical service equipment must now be marked in the field, with the maximum available fault current at the incoming terminals of the equipment and the date that the fault current calculation was made.
• 110.3(A)(1) Any special conditions that may be essential to the safe use or functioning of the equipment could be included as a part of the listing and labeling.
• 200.4 Neutral conductors shall not be shared unless they are specifically permitted to be shared, as indicated elsewhere in the code.
• 210.8 Ground-fault circuit interruption for personnel are required to be installed in a readily accessible location.
• 210.8(B)(5) GFCI receptacles are now required to be used near sinks in healthcare facilities. Exception No. 2, for receptacles located in patient bed locations of general care or critical care areas of health care facilities other than those covered under 210.8(B)(1), GFCI Protection shall not be required. 
• 210.12(A) Types MC (metal clad) and, steel armor type AC (armor clad) cable may now be used between the panel and the first device, when arc-fault circuit interrupter (AFCI) protection is required for that circuit.
• 210.12(B) When modifications or extensions are made to an existing branch circuit in a residence and the code requires that the area have AFCI protective devices, the modified or extended branch circuit must now have an AFCI device installed.
• 230.44 If cable trays contain service entrance conductors (types SE (service entrance), MC, MI (mineral insulated), and IGS (integrated gas spacer)), then the trays must be labeled with the wording “Service Entrance Conductors.”
• 250.92(B) Bonding conductors are required around reducing washers and concentric or eccentric knock-outs for all service entrance conduit connections at the service entrance equipment.
• 300.4(E) Cables, conduits, boxes, and other raceways are not permitted to be installed closer than 1½” in exposed or concealed locations under metal-corrugated sheet roof decking.
• 300.5(C) Type MI and MC cables that are listed for direct burial or in concrete are permitted to be installed within the concrete, below buildings.
• 300.11(A)(1)(2) When independent electrical equipment support wires are installed within dropped-ceiling areas, they shall be distinguished by color, tagging, or other permanent effective means.
• 300.50(B) The interior of underground raceways shall be considered to be wet locations. Therefore, any connections and splices shall be approved for wet locations.
• 310.10(H)(1) Conductors smaller than 1/0 are no longer permitted to be paralleled for increased ampacity.
• 348.42 angle connectors for flexible metal conduit (FMC) are not permitted to be concealed.
• 392.18(H) Cable trays containing conductors over 600 volts are now required to be marked “Danger–High Voltage–Keep Away”.
• 406.4(D)(5) For installations in which tamper-proof receptacles are required and receptacles are being replaced, the installer is now required to install “listed” tamper-proof receptacles.
• 406.13 Tamper-resistant receptacles are now required in all guest rooms and guest suites.
• 410.16 Luminaires in clothes closets are permitted to be either surface or recessed LED, with completely enclosed light sources, fluorescent, or totally enclosed incandescent fixtures.
• 410.130(G)(1) For existing installed luminaires without disconnecting means, at the time a ballast is replaced, a disconnecting means shall be installed.
• 450.14 Transformers other than Class 2 or Class 3 are required to have line-side disconnecting means within sight of the transformer, or the disconnecting means must be lockable, and the location shall be field marked on the transformer.
• 500.2 A definition has been added to define the parameters, or make up of, combustible dusts.
• 501(B)(5) This new code paragraph clarifies the differences between Class 1, Division 1, and Division 2 installations, where metallic conduit does not provide sufficient corrosion resistance, listed flexible conductors, factory elbows and associated fittings shall be permitted, where restricted public access and only qualified  persons service the equipment.
• 517.13(B) The requirement for redundant grounding conductors has been clarified and states that the insulated bonding jumper from the metallic box to the equipment grounding conductor is permitted.
• 517.16 Isolated ground receptacles are not permitted to be installed within any patient care areas.
• 517.17(B) If there is only one level of overcurrent protection between the incoming service entrance and transfer switches, the second level of ground fault protection that is normally required for healthcare facilities shall not be installed downstream of the transfer switches.
• 517.18(A) Receptacles in patient bed locations shall not be a part of a multi-wire branch circuit (i.e., have a neutral in common with another phase conductor).
• 517.160(A)(5) Conductors for an isolated power system shall be identified by a continuous, distinctive colored stripe other than white, green, or gray along their entire length.
• 547.5(G) For engineers designing barns, the code no longer permits deleting GFCI protection on an outlet for a piece of dedicated equipment when that piece of equipment is within 3’ of another GFCI outlet.
• 620.53 Exception: Disconnects are required for elevator cab lights and ventilation, but if the ventilation motor is less than 2 HP or less an 300 volts, a general-use snap switch may be used as this disconnecting means.
• 645.17 The requirements for power distribution unit (PDU) panelboards used  for information technology equipment, shall be permitted to have multiple panelboards within a single cabinet, if the power distribution unit is utilization equipment and is listed for information technology application.
• 690 Due to the wide popularity of photovoltaic (PV) systems, broad changes have been made in this section.
• 694 A new article to address wind-powered electric generating systems.
• 695 The code for electrically driven fire pumps has been modified to closely correlate to the requirements of NFPA 20.
• 700.10(D)(1) Feeder circuit cables for emergency systems must now be rated for a minimum 2 hours fire rating.
• 700.27 Exception: Selective coordination is no longer required for overcurrent devices that are installed in series if no loads are connected in parallel with the downstream device.
• 701.6(D) There is now a requirement for ground fault indication for legally required standby systems of 150 volts to ground and circuit protective devices rated 1000 amperes, which is similar to that previously required only for emergency systems.

This list was modified from a more detailed list featured in Consulting-Specifying Engineer.

For Canada, the Canadian Electrical Code was updated for 2012. 

Learn how to schedule a free on-site Electrical Product Safety Seminar.

MET Labs participated in a meeting this week of the United States National Committee of the IECEE to discuss a number of issues. 

E3 Program
There was much discussion about the E3 Program (Energy Efficiency, Energy Performance & Energy Consumption), covered in Compliance Today previously.

The U.S. initially opposed the E3 Program because there is a lack of harmonization.  As it stands, there is no assured reciprocity and there is no certificate issued, just a Statement of Test Results (STR).  It is up to the reader of the STR to decide to accept or not.

IEC 62368-1
UL and CSA have recently published harmonized versions of IEC 62368-1. It will, however, likely be a long time before this becomes a NRTL standard due to OSHA’s workload and their likely objection to its inclusion of hazard-based analysis. Major labs will list to it, but if a product is going into the workplace, then 60950 or 60065 must still be used. 

Only the U.S., Sweden and Denmark have adopted 62368-1 in the Scheme per the CB website. Canada is to participate soon, as is France. The Netherlands may participate soon.

More about IEC 62368-1 is found in this Compliance Today post.

China EMC
China is not currently accepting EMC within the Scheme.  China’s objection may be that this was once voluntary and that the Scheme adopted EMC as mandatory and have not given China time to revise its standards.

Motors
At least one manufacturer thinks there is a need for motors to be in the safety CB Scheme.  The only place a motor standard is covered is within the EMC Scheme.  NEMA’s 1MG Section is continuing its conversation regarding the inclusion of electric motors as part of the E3 Program. 

Next meetings are May 22-23, 2012 in Vancouver, Canada, and August 7-8, 2012 in Orange County, California.

See a list of participating CB Scheme countries, and get a quote for CB Scheme testing.

Yesterday was the last full day of the 2012 ICPHSO Annual Meeting and Training Symposium.  

The day featured a keynote by U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Chairman Inez Moore Tenenbaum (pictured delivering the keynote).  Some of her key points:

• CPSC is being proactive at ports.  In 2010 & 2011, 6.5M units of over 2,000 products were seized.
• Independent 3rd party testing is set up and running well.
• A strong CPSC is good for business – it provides a more level playing field.
• Standards development, recalls process, and federal rulemaking will be priorities in 2012.
• Successful Saferproducts.gov public database will have one year anniversary on March 11.  It has had 6,300 unsafe product reports.

Penalties and Enforcement
Also featured was a panel on Penalties and Enforcement, featuring Cheryl Falvey, U.S. CPSC General Counsel.  Some of the points made there:

In August 2009, the maximum penalty went from $1.8M to $15M. 

If the duty to report occurred in 2008 but was not reported until 2010, the violation occurred in the higher penalty period.

A failure to report and the deliberate subsequent sale of recalled product doubles the maximum penalty to $30M.

There has been less self-reporting and more anticipated litigation since the penalty increase.

There is no formula to calculating a penalty.  Statutory factors include:

• Nature
• Circumstance
• Extent and gravity of the violation

Other factors include:

• Safety/compliance program
• History of noncompliance
• Economic gain for noncompliance
• Failure to respond timely to staff requests

Every settlement is subject to approval by CPSC commissioners.  Then it is listed in the Federal Register for public comment.

The CPSC is looking for a case that makes a statement.  “This has a deterrent effect,” says Falvey.

Individuals are now being pursued for felony criminal penalties.  This often happens with Subchapter S corporations, where the individual is virtually the same as the corporation.

The CPSC can be creative.  E&B Giftware was given a $550,000 civil penalty, with all but $50,000 suspended if they met requirements of the settlement.

The whistleblower provision in the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) of 2008 has only been used once.  Calls are more likely to be a trade complaint from a competitor.

Electrical products need product safety certification.  Contact MET Labs for details.