[RFI] Update 9/30/16 Solar Panel RFI @ K2MO

[Cortland Richmond]

>From:Tony-K2MO
>Sep 30, 2016 8:10 PM
>
>It seems logical to me that that the responsibility would lie with the 
>installer if the installation was found to be at fault, while the 
>manufacturer would be responsible if the device doesn't meet FCC standards.
>
>Can anyone clarify the responsibility issue? Is there a case where the 
>manufacturer and / or installer were held responsible for causing RFI?

In a discussion now underway on the IEEE EMC-PSTC mailing list, one addressing the issue that Part 15 standards allow emissions too high to assure non-interference, I suggested that what the FCC is reluctant to do, customer firms – for example, retailers and chains – can enforce by requiring manufacturers warranty their products against creating harmful interference and (possibly) against being interfered with by nearby transmitters and other emitters.

This would shield installers and retailers from eating the costs avoided by manufacturers.

The relevant portions of Part 15 that warn manufacturers they may need to do better are sections 15.15 and 15.17; manufacturers can't say they weren't aware they might be required to do more than merely comply with the limits.

Cortland Richmond
KA5S