In general, the average guy on the street believes FCC has all to do with
radio and television, licensing intentional radiators (like us amateurs),
and managing the RF spectrum (although, that last is a stretch). Beyond
that, he/she sees absolutely no involvement of the FCC (and other RF
industries). I dare propose he/she is totally unaware of requirements on
medical devices. Even hand tools they believe are no concern of the FCC.
The "Graffitti Panel" (my term for the regulatory label on most products)
is nonsense to the average Joe. He/she MAY look for the UL mark for
safety, but it ends there. My dad brought us up to be label readers and
knew what was behind the UL mark for safety (although not to the detail I
now appreciate). The rest, he referred to FCC. He also read food labels
as he was in the baby formula industry. That was totally new to my
wonderful bride of 39+ years. He was a rare bird and possibly one of the
many reasons I finally went into RFI/EMC. When it comes to anything other
than 'traditional' FCC concerns, apathy reigns supreme (and a lot of
intentional ignorance, as well). Those of us in this group owe it to
ourselves to be familiar with ALL the FCC regs and how to access them
online to prove a (doubted) point when necessary.
Addressing the reply from the washer/dryer supplier that really started
this thread, what they fired back in the Letter has been proposed, but not
adopted. This is the statement that turns Part 15 upside down requiring
the radio receiver to deal with the interference instead of the burden
being placed on the supplier (the standard required FCC statement that must
appear on all Part 15, Subpart B (non-intentional radiators), Class B (home
and small office) products.
Enough on my part.........
Dave - WØLEV
On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 4:50 PM Jim McCook <JimW6YA@cox.net> wrote:
> Dave.... I often wonder if it's unawareness or complete disregard. In
> any case, the FCC seems unconcerned. In CA the biggest problem is the
> Energy Commission that makes the rules, completely unaware of the RFI
> problem from switching power supplies. I have been working with the
> person who oversees rulemaking; he was truly unaware of the potential
> conflict between CA rules and FCC part 15. He promises to research the
> subject with the possible result of a rule change, but I'm not holding
> my breath. I will keep checking in with him to see if there is any
> progress. Jim, W6YA
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
>
--
*Dave - WØLEV*
*Just Let Darwin Work*
*Just Think*
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|