In light of the new FCC rules that Chinese (and all non-MRA) labs will no longer recognised in July and all EMC tests need to be done at FCC-authorized Telecommunications Certification Bodies, for FCC EMC tests that were previously done at Chinese, etc. labs, will they all need to be redone? If they do, that could probably mean a massive surge in demand in the months following July.

  • \$\begingroup\$ You better contact the related authority. \$\endgroup\$ – Eugene Sh. Mar 28 '16 at 13:39
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Barring any contradictory information from a field related legal authority, assume YES. \$\endgroup\$ – Asmyldof Mar 28 '16 at 14:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ If all historical non-MRA certifications become invalid you can expect a lot of products being recalled, this seems a bit unlikely. I would expect all new testing to require satisfactory labs and any retesting as well, possibly any new products marketed or perhaps even previous products imported requiring new certificates. The annulling of existing certificates would get messy. Automotive recalls also happen but are more serious due to safety concerns. \$\endgroup\$ – KalleMP Mar 28 '16 at 14:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KalleMP If historical certifications aren't rescinded, wouldn't it entice device makers to rush in before the July deadline? \$\endgroup\$ – WKleinberg Mar 28 '16 at 14:37
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ FCC regulations don't just require type testing. They require all devices sold or used to meet the emissions limits and to not interfere with other services. So anybody who rushed a noncompliant device through testing at a dodgy lab would be opening themselves up to enormous liability. \$\endgroup\$ – The Photon Mar 28 '16 at 14:41

This is certainly not the place to ask for legal or regulatory advice, but my quick 5 minutes on Google suggests that it is only future certifications to be performed by the new smaller set of labs. Existing certification is still verified (on an ongoing basis) by market purchases, so should not be subject to any lower standard today or in future. A fraudulent test report is still no defence for shipping non-compliant product.

Where there could be problems is for product intending to reach compliance before the cut-off, but failing to make the deadline for some reason. In that case you'd need to repeat the testing.

Assuming the rules are for honest reasons, I guess the change is because the number of different products is increasing, and market sampling is becoming less effective at catching incorrectly certified products.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.