FCC Certification ...

I haven't seen any such test reports.

Liz wrote:

... so hopefully we should have another update for you soon. With graphs in. We know you guys love graphs.

http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/878

But I don't recall seeing any such graphs.

I remember seeing that loooooooooooong time ago.

BTW, you can also add to the list that the hazardous materials tests report is not available either and the individual ROHS certificate automatically generated by e14 won't do.

I'm about to give my final recommendation to a large school district and without those reports it will be a big NO NO for the Raspberry Pi.

-J

I note that Farnell UK declares very strong policy statements, which include:

Statement of Quality Policy (part) [my highlighting]

 

All employees will be appropriately trained so they understand fully the importance of meeting customer as well as statutory and regulatory requirements. All training will be recorded.

Top management support will be given at all levels of the business to ensure that sufficient resource is available to realise customer expectations, to ensure legal compliance and to see that the requirements of any relevant national or international standards are satisfied.

That sounds very professional, and it doesn't leave much room for misinterpretation.

So why is there so much difficulty in locating and supplying the relevant certifications that were obtained by Raspberry Pi?  Or does the above Statement of Quality Policy apply only to Farnell UK?

BTW, you can also add to the list that the hazardous materials tests report is not available either and the individual ROHS certificate automatically generated by e14 won't do.

There are a few tidbits here:

... the product was tested for RoHS which showed bromine in several plastics and a trace of cadmium in one component but was declared compliant, and the REACH analysis of Substances of Very High Concern concluded that the Pi was low risk.

http://www.element14.com/community/community/legislation/europe/other/blog/2012/05/02/raspberry-pi--the-road-to-compliance

btw, there was an interesting case a few years ago of Hobby Lobby importing

RF devices without proper FCC certification, as discussed in this thread:

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1057497

post #2 says:

Jeti is working on the FCC paperwork. It is my understanding that the system meets all the requirements.

 

 

Thanks,

Jason Cole

Hobby Lobby

post #6 says:

Hey guys,

I'm not exactly sure about the process. It's my understanding that the modules and rx's meet all of the FCC requirements, but Jeti never went the certification process. We have suspended all sales until this is worked out. We will inform customers who purchased thus far if they need to do anything. Hopefully Jeti will resolve this soon, I really want to try out the variometer!

 

 

Thanks,

Jason Cole

Hobby Lobby

 

In the recommendation I'm working on, said reports (not just a self made certification of complaince) have to be public records, where is shown who, where, how and when the tests were done and the detailed results of each sections of the test and detailed analysis.

The underlying issue is a question and game of liabilites.

-J

The recent $30M Apple contract for the Los Angeles Unified School District shows (p. 11)

  http://www.scribd.com/doc/156571124/Apple-LAUSD-iPad-Contract-Signed-FINAL-7-16

25. FCC AND UL APPROVAL

Motherboards used to manufacture the desktop, mobile computers, and server computer systems

provided under this Contract must be Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved,

and the power supplies must be Underwriters Laboratories (UL) approved.

Complete systems must be submitted to the FCC for evaluation and certification, or self certified

(declaration of compliance) in accordance with guidelines established by the FCC for self

certification. Each such system must have FCC and UL or self-certification/labeling affixed to

the back of each system.

Systems without FCC and UL approval or declaration of compliance statements and labels will

be considered non-compliant and will be rejected. Desktop and laptop systems must be FCC

Class B certified, or self certified, and server systems must be FCC Class A certified, or self

certified.

I note that Farnell UK declares very strong policy statements, which include:

 

Statement of Quality Policy (part) [my highlighting]

 

All employees will be appropriately trained so they understand fully the importance of meeting customer as well as statutory and regulatory requirements. All training will be recorded.

 

Top management support will be given at all levels of the business to ensure that sufficient resource is available to realise customer expectations, to ensure legal compliance and to see that the requirements of any relevant national or international standards are satisfied.

I decided to see if any of the Newark support folks on live chat have any such training

on FCC regulatory requirements.  Here's the relevant excerpt:

me:  What are you basing your opinion on? Have you been trained at all on FCC rules?

agent:  No I have not you may contact the FCC directly or you may contact the Raspberry PI foundation.

agent:  I have sent you a link for that before.

me:  Is there someone else I can chat with that has some training on FCC rules?

agent:  We are not trained on FCC rules I apologize.

me:  Is there someone else I can chat with that has some training on FCC rules?

agent:  No I am sorry we do not have anyone that is trained on that in our department.

The policy statements I quoted are from Farnell UK, and unfortunately I have no information whatsoever about their relevance or otherwise to Premier Farnell as a whole.  I would certainly hope that the entire group holds to these policies (or similar ones) because that would underline their committment to professional engineering and social responsibility.  That's just my personal hope though.

I'm not aware of who runs Newark's "live chat", but judging by your excerpt, it seems that they have not been trained to the policy standards of Farnell UK.  It may not be strategic to pursue that though --- beware of detours that just make the desired destination even more distant..

The interest here should be purely in obtaining factual information about Pi certification, promptly, in order to meet "customer as well as statutory and regulatory requirements".  (Quoting Farnell UK again.)  I welcome anything that brings that closer.

It's a bit concerning that anyone has to beg for this.  Certifications aren't supposed to be secret.

I'm not aware of who runs Newark's "live chat",

Her name is Rachelle Sheffer, technical support manager.

http://www.element14.com/community/thread/17930

Certifications aren't supposed to be secret.

Of course not.  And they aren't. 

http://www.element14.com/community/docs/DOC-44828/l/raspberry-pi-safety-data-sheet

What is secret is the legal justification for selling a Class B device,

and portable computers are considered Class B devices,

to residential customers with only a Class A certificate. 

Is that the issue here, that there is no evidence of Class B certification?  (I haven't been following the story, sorry.)

If so, can't we just ask, point blank?

Element14, do the existing revisions of Raspberry Pi currently being sold by the group have FCC Class B (Residential) Certification?  If they do, please link to the certificate, and if not, please confirm that it's lacking. (Don't pass the buck!)

These are just matters of fact.  How hard can it be?