New website for EESS (Electrical Equipment Safety Scheme – Australia)


The new EESS website now stands alone to support regulatory activities across multiple states. The safety of household electrical equipment in Queensland, Victoria, Western Australia and Tasmania is regulated using the Electrical Equipment Safety System (EESS), which now has a new online presence at: http://www.EESS.gov.au.

EESS.gov.au removes functions previously found on the Electrical Regulatory Authorities Council (ERAC) website and presents them with enhanced and improved layout and structure, based on feedback from industry.

Source: New standalone website for EESS (Electrical Equipment Safety Scheme)

The New Australian Regulatory Compliance Mark


The RCM is now mandatory for electrical safety in Australia and New Zealand On March 1, 2013, Australia’s Regulatory Compliance Mark (RCM) commenced the transition to replace the C-tick and A-tick …

Source: The New Australian Regulatory Compliance Mark

Regulatory Compliance Mark (RCM) for Australia and New Zealand | paulspiece.com


This paper and companion presentation were written by Paul W Robinson, Australia, and presented to the IEEE Symposium on Product Compliance Engineering (ISPCE) in Orange County, May 2016 …

Source: Regulatory Compliance Mark (RCM) for Australia and New Zealand | paulspiece.com

Worksafe New Zealand: New Electrical Equipment Declared Articles (April 2016)


ACMA – RCM – end of transition period approaching


The single Regulatory Compliance Mark (RCM) was introduced on 1 March 2013 with a three-year transition period to 29 February 2016.

The RCM illustrates a product’s compliance with all applicable ACMA standards—telecommunications, radiocommunications, electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) and electromagnetic energy (EME).

Suppliers must register on the online national database and start using the RCM by 1 March 2016.

Products that have already been labelled with the C-Tick or A-Tick can continue to be supplied until labelled stock has been exhausted.

Source: Single compliance mark—end of transition period approaching!

Australia EESS Q&A – UPS & PDU


Note: this Q&A contains personal opinions only, that are of a general nature. They have not been reviewed or endorsed by any organisation or regulatory agency, but are provided as a friendly informational perspective only. In all cases, readers should rely on their own research and professional & legal advice.

Q: Are UPS or PDU covered by L2/L3 categories in the EESS (for example as battery chargers)?

A1a: I’m going to assume the enquirer meant a 230 V ac input-output UPS was intended.  The short answer is: although a UPS does charge a battery, it appears to be L1 equipment only. This is because the regulatory definitions are in AS/NZS 4417.2, and B.2.36 there specifies that for the device to be covered by L3 for Australia or L2 for NZ, it has to have an output voltage not exceeding 50 V a.c. or 120 V d.c only, which is the ELV range. In case of doubt, the referenced battery charger standard is AS/NZS 60335.2.29, and the latest version of that says it only applies to equipment with ELV outputs, so that can’t be applied to an LV (230 V range) output device either.

A1b: If the UPS has a detachable power cord set, the mains plug, flexible cord and the appliance coupler all need individual certification at L3. It’s a good idea to use already-certified standard cord sets, so if you’re using already approved parts in the cord set for the UPS,  you don’t have to certify them again to use with the UPS. If the cord set is non-detachable, only the mains plug is an L3 part.

A2: PDU (I assume the enquirer meant power distribution unit) is a little trickier. The short answer is they’re generally L1, but it depends, so please read on: The closest regulatory category to that is B.2.34 “Outlet device” in AS/NZS 4417.2. 

A2a: A PDU consisting of appliance outlets such as IEC 60320 types in a strip would be exempt from L2/L3 as a whole, because the definition for outlet device covers socket-outlet devices (as per definition B.2.45) only. 

A2b: Further, if the PDU was built into a machine, such as a rack, it’s not portable, and that would exempt it from B.2.34 as well even if it used AS/NZS 3112 socket-outlets.

A2c: The socket-outlet (if used instead of AS/NZS 60320 (IEC 60320) appliance outlets) itself would be L3, because of definition B.2.45.

A2d: The supply flexible cord (B.2.47) would also be exempt from L2/L3 if it is directly connected to the equipment (non-detachable) – because of part (f) of the definition.

A2e: The power attachment mains plug also needs to be considered L3 per B.2.35. Again, it’s a good idea to use certified parts if the part used is within the definition.

Hope the above observations will be of use to somebody. Again, the answers depend on your own product circumstances, and there might be other arrangements I haven’t discussed above, so its important to seek your own professional advice.

PWR.

Q&A on the Australian safety standard AS/NZS 60950.1:2011 with Amdt 1:2012


The following answers to the questions sent to me are my from own perspective, given for guidance only. These are not definitively authoritative, however they are given in good faith, so if you need to make business decisions on these matters you’d need to seek your own counsel, as no liability will be accepted for any possible errors or omissions or if something doesn’t cover your situation. If there are any errors in my responses below I’d be delighted for anyone to enlighten me further.

  1. AS/NZS 60950.1:2011 – This is already published in 2011; revised in Nov 2012 to add Amdt 1 issued by IEC TC108.
  2. Please advise if it is mandatory and if there is any effective date established?
    • PWR#: No specific dates have been established for use of Amdt 1 with telecommunications equipment at this time (but see item 6 below). It may be used now for non-telecommunications safety approvals (e.g. EPSs). Earlier editions would be usable only at the electrical regulators’ discretion.
  3. Any AU/NZS national differences?
    • PWR: There are no new mandatory national differences in the amendment, but note that AS/NZS 60825.1 can be used in lieu of IEC 60825-1. This is worth noting because the Australian laser standard also has significant national differences, and compliance with that might not mean compliance with the IEC standard has been achieved (worth keeping in mind for products sold overseas that were tested in Australia).
  4. ACMA is now attempting to adopt the standard in item 1 as its telecom standard.
    • PWR#: That is correct.
  5. ACMA is not introducing any significant national differences except as indicated at the website given below.
    • PWR#: ACMA is not introducing any differences that are not already in AS/NZS 60950:2011 + Amdt 1:2012.
  6. Will this standard be mandatory in AU/NZS for telecom equipment and if yes, what will be the effective date?
    • PWR#: Yes, but the date is a bit more complex… The ACMA “Standard” that’s being amended is essentially a hidden legal instrument that makes Australian Standard AS/NZS 60950.1 +Amdt 1 mandatory, and the ACMA standard essentially contains no technical requirements itself. The intent is that compliance with Australian Standard AS/NZS 60950.1 +Amdt 1 will satisfy the requirements in the ACMA standard (which is also given the same designation for legal reasons, but I’ll call it the “ACMA standard” to try to avoid confusion.) The ACMA standard, when published (probably in August/September) will then make the CURRENT REVISION of the Australian Standard mandatory on publication, and so on into the future. It also allows that products manufactured or imported within twelve months of the new Australian Standard or revision being published can be tested to the prior version of the Australian standard (but not to earlier versions than the one prior). This means, for example, that a product manufactured or imported up to 2013-11-09 (the first anniversary of the publication date of Amdt 1) may comply with AS/NZS 60950.1:2011 with or without Amdt 1:2012, however AFTER 2013-11-09, all new certifications must be done in accordance with AS/NZS 60950.1 + Amdt 1 in place. I hope this clarifies.

http://beta.acma.gov.au/theACMA/Consultations/Consultations/Current/draft-telecommunications-technical-standard-as-nzs-60950-1-2011-amendment-2013.

EESS database upgrade (Australian electrical equipment safety certification process)


(The following was received from the EESS secretariat recently, who wanted it circulated in industry…):

The responsible supplier/equipment registration database is being upgraded following feedback from users. The testing of these changes is in final stages and, if they all work, the release of the updates will occur shortly.  An email will be sent to all registered responsible suppliers just prior to the upgrade going live.

Major changes include:

  1. The 10 digit supplier number (i.e ERAC000123), which is also the responsible supplier username for logging onto the system, has been simplified to be EX (where X is the digits of the existing supplier number – i.e. the ‘RAC’ of ERAC is removed and the 0’s of the supplier number is removed).
  2. So for example a supplier number of ERAC000512 simply becomes E512.This becomes the registration number for all documentation and can be used to mark on a product as the supplier number if required (for example NZ Radio Spectrum Management marking requirement). It also becomes the user name for the responsible supplier to log onto the EESS database, note the responsible supplier password will not change.
    Note: use of the existing 10 digit number on documents and equipment will be recognised as being the valid supplier number issued by ERAC where it has already been marked on equipment or the marking process has already been initiated.
  3. The phone number field in responsible supplier details allows for more than 10 digits, as well as the recognition of + for the country code (to allow for NZ company registrations).
  4. When registering as a responsible supplier there is now an ‘affiliated supplier’ field for a responsible supplier to nominate the related New Zealand company for which the responsible supplier is taking responsibility for the equipment supplied by that company (and vice versa if the responsible supplier is a New Zealand registered company).
    Affiliated Supplier –  A company that is a related entity to the company registered as a responsible supplier. Affiliated suppliers are limited to Australia/New Zealand related entities. If the responsible supplier is located in Australia the affiliated supplier is the related entity in New Zealand, if the responsible supplier is located in New Zealand the affiliated supplier is the related entity located in Australia.  The responsible supplier (registered in either Australia or New Zealand) registers and takes responsibility for all items supplied by the affiliated supplier . A company listed as an affiliated supplier, by a responsible supplier, does not need to register as a separate responsible supplier.
  5. Authorised representatives are now de-selectable or selectable byresponsible suppliers via the ‘edit profile’ section for responsible suppliers.
  6. Authorised representatives will be able to add level 1 equipment as well as register level 2 and 3 equipment.
  7. Authorised representatives added by a responsible supplier will be able to action any equipment registration of the responsible supplier (not limited to just the equipment the Authorised representative had originally actioned).
  8. The ‘details description’ field is no longer mandatory to have data entered.
  9. Equipment registration length has been modified to allow choosing 5 year registration option when certificate has less than 5 years, but more than 2 years, before expiry (note the registration expiry date is still linked to the certificate expiry date so choosing the 5 year registration option may only result in, for example, a 4 year 3 month registration if the certificate expires in 4 years and 3 months). Equipment with certificates that expire in 2 years or less will still only be given the 1 or 2 year option.
  10. Where a certificate profile has multiple brands and models and the responsible supplier is only importing/manufacturing some of those brands/models, the responsible supplier will now be able to choose via a tick box which models/brands they are a responsible supplier of – or they can choose to select all models/brands of that profile.
  11. Level 1 equipment details can now be entered in several different ways
    • existing method,  type / brand (and optional model number)
    • using a csv file to upload detail of multiple equipment (brand and type are still mandatory)
    • inputting a certificate of suitability number to import across the level 1 equipment detail
  12. The certificate number of registered equipment will now be viewable in the public search section.
  13. Level 1 equipment details will now be searchable in same public viewable location as level 2 and 3 equipment.
  14. Receipting errors fixed.
    Uploading of Certificates:
  15. The manual upload for certifiers to add details of their certificates is in final stages of testing.
  16. The xml process for certifiers to automatically upload their certificate details is being tested with several certifiers.
  17. A ‘certificate lock down’ system is being included to limit ability to register certificates to responsible suppliers as chosen by the certificate holder (in general, process will be the certifier will add a password onto the database when uploading certificate details. The certificate holder will give this password to a responsible supplier so the responsible supplier can put in that password to use the certificate details to register equipment).
  18. The ‘deed of access’ for certifiers to sign is being finalised (essentially this is a document required to be signed by certifiers to ensure they accept use of the database ‘as is’ and do not add any virus, malicious software, damage the database in any way, that the data they input will be true an correct to best of their knowledge and they will indemnify regulators in regard to use of their data by anyone).

****************************************************************

ACMA – New single compliance mark–RCM replaces C-Tick and A-Tick from today


ACMA – New single compliance mark–RCM.

Announcement

Single compliance mark scheme begins

The Australian Communications and Media Authority has today introduced a single compliance mark (RCM) to illustrate a device’s compliance with all applicable ACMA standards—telecommunications, radiocommunications, electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) and electromagnetic energy (EME). The C-Tick and A-Tick compliance marks are being phased out.

Revised Update on Australia’s RCM for electrical equipment and ACMA’s regulations


This update has been revised on 2012-07-11 with new information. If you reviewed it before, please review it again now.

Until the official commencement of the EESS, some suppliers may wish to transition to the RCM sooner, to simplify production schedules. This is presently possible, with some limitations and conditions, under the legacy rules (excluding telecommunications products), but is not possible under the new rules until 1 March 2013. Please note the following issues related to this:

  1. The new AS/NZS 4417.1 & AS/NZS 4417.2 edition: 2012 standards were published on 29 June 2012. These will replace all of the earlier editions and parts of 4417.x on the 1st March 2013 (refer to the preface in the standards). Until then the RCM process requirements are unchanged, and the existing 2009 edition documents with their associated amendments continue to apply.
  2. The EESS registration database is not in production at the time of writing and cannot be used for official purposes, even though there’s a link to an evaluation version on the ERAC web site. The EESS database may be available for trial registrations later in 2012, but I’m advised these trial registrations will not have regulatory effect. If suppliers use the trial registration system, they will still need to re-register when the official database is cut over.
  3. The advice at this time is that the 2012 edition of AS/NZS 4417.1 cannot be used for EESS or ACMA purposes until 1 March 2013. The Preface says the 2012 edition “supersedes the 2009 edition … on 1 March 2013”. It does not say the 2012 edition can’t be used before that date. However regulators indicate that the 2009 editions and the associated legacy processes will remain in place until 1 March 2013.
  4. The 2009 edition legacy RCM standards can still be used until 1 March 2013, when the EESS is scheduled to commence, as they are currently being used up to now. The RCM registrar will continue to allow new supplier registrations up to the time the EESS commences. New-supplier registrations on the old system will terminate when the EESS process has officially begun.
  5. Note that under the 2009 edition legacy requirements, a level 1 electrical article under the EESS scheme (i.e non-declared electrical article) is required to have a Certificate of Suitability (or equivalent) from an Australian electrical safety authority before the RCM can be used. This applies too for EMC or radio-communications purposes (note that the legacy requirements don’t apply to telecommunications regulations). For battery-powered or ELV-powered EMC or radio-communications products, a Certificate of Suitability is not required, since it’s not mains-powered, thus out of scope of AS/NZS 4417.2:2009 (+Amdt1)
  6. Telecommunications products can’t use the RCM in lieu of the A-Tick mark until ACMA updates the relevant Telecommunications Labelling Notice (TLN) to give it legal effect, and formal registrations have commenced under the EESS. See the following web site: http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_312467 for links to the various labelling notices managed by ACMA.
  7. Also under the legacy requirements, the supplier identification needs to be marked with the RCM on the products (this won’t be required under the 2012 RCM standard). This does allow several alternative forms of supplier ID, such as the company logo of the responsible company. It doesn’t have to be the registered supplier code number specifically

I hope this is clear. If you have any questions please let me know or leave a commen

Updated V6b overview document

%d bloggers like this: