PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES Sample Clauses

PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES. The procedures to be followed by New Zealand in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against the European Community’s requirements The procedures to be followed by the European Community in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against New Zealand’s requirements The conformity assessment bodies listed in Section II will meet the requirements of the Directives listed in Section I, taking into account Council Decision 93/465/EEC of 22 July 1993 concerning the modules for the various phases of the conformity assessment procedures and the rules for the affixing and use of the CE conformity marking, which are intended to be used in the technical harmonisation directives and be designated on the basis of the procedures defined in the Annex to the Agreement. This may be demonstrated through: (a) Product certification bodies operating according to the requirements of EN 45011 or ISO Guides 28 and 40, and either: 1. The procedures for designating conformity assessment bodies will be consistent with the principles and procedures set out in the Annex to the Agreement. 2. The following procedures are deemed to be consistent with those set out in the Annex to the Agreement: (a) Certification bodies: — accredited by accreditation bodies which are signatories to the European cooperation for Accreditation (EA) Multilateral Agreement on Certification, — members of the IECEE CB Scheme — accredited by the Joint Accreditation System of Australia and New Zealand (XXX-ANZ), or — accredited by an accreditation body with which XXX-ANZ has a mutual recognition agreement, or — able to demonstrate competence by other means in accordance with Sections A and B of the Annex to the Agreement. — able to demonstrate competence by other means in accordance with Sections A and B of the Annex to the Agreement.
Sample 1Sample 2See All (9)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES. The procedures to be followed by New Zealand in designating Conformity Assessment Bodies to assess products against the European Community’s requirements The procedures to be followed by the European Community in designating Conformity Assessment Bodies to assess products against New Zealand’s requirements The Conformity Assessment Bodies listed in Section II will meet the requirements of the Directives listed in Section I, taking into account Council Decision 93/465/EEC of 22 July 1993 concerning the modules for the various phases of the conformity assessment procedures and the rules for the affixing and use of the CE conformity marking, which are intended to be used in the technical harmonisation directives and be designated on the basis of the procedures defined in the Annex to the Agreement. This may be demonstrated through: (a) Inspection Bodies operating according to the requirements of EN 45004 or ISO Guide 39, and either: 1. The procedures for designating conformity assessment bodies will be consistent with the principles and procedures set out in the Annex to the Agreement. 2. The following procedures are deemed to be consistent with those set out in the Annex to the Agreement: Testing Laboratories: — accredited by accreditation bodies which are signatories to the European cooperation for Accreditation (EA) Multilateral Agreement on Calibration and Testing, or — accredited by the Testing Laboratory Registration Council of New Zealand, or — recognised within the IECEE CB Scheme, or — able to demonstrate competence by other means in accordance with Sections A and B of the Annex to the Agreement. — able to demonstrate competence by other means in accordance with Sections A and B of the Annex to the Agreement.
Sample 1Sample 2See All (7)
PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES. The procedures to be followed by New Zealand in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against the European Union’s requirements The procedures to be followed by the European Union in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against New Zealand’s requirements
Sample 1Sample 2See All (4)
PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES. The procedures to be followed by Australia in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against the European Community’s requirements The procedures to be followed by the European Community in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against Australia’s requirements The conformity assessment bodies listed in Section II will meet the requirements of the Directives listed in Section I, taking into account Council Decision 93/465/EEC of 22 July 1993 concerning the modules for the various phases of the conformity assessment procedures and the rules for the affixing and use of the CE conformity marking, which are intended to be used in the technical harmonisation directives, and are designated on the basis of the procedures defined in the Annex to the Agreement. This may be demonstrated through: In accordance with the specific requirements set out in the legislation, regulations and administrative provisions listed in Section I, and where these make compliance with Australian standards for plant mandatory, the conformity assessment bodies listed in Section II are designated by the designating authorities specified in Section III in accordance with the following criteria: — Design verification for compliance with technical standards may not be required under all legislation listed in Section I. (a) For the purpose of Directive 89/392/EEC of 14 June 1989 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to machinery: Inspection bodies operating to the requirements of EN 45004 or ISO Guide 39, and either: — accredited by NATA, or — able to demonstrate competence by other means in accordance with Sections A and B of the Annex to the Agreement. — If design verification is required it must be conducted by a design verifier who has not been involved in the machinery design and who has acquired through training, qualification, or experience, or a combination of these, the knowledge and skills enabling that person to perform this task. Where the designer and design verifier are employed or engaged by the same person the whole of the design process must, if the legislation requires, operate:
Sample 1Sample 2
PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES. The procedures to be followed by Australia in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against the European Community’s requirements The procedures to be followed by the European Community in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against Australia’s requirements The conformity assessment bodies listed in Section II must meet the requirements of the Directives listed in Section I, taking into account Council Decision 93/465/EEC of 22 July 1993 concerning the modules for the various phases of the conformity assessment procedures and the rules for the affixing and use of the CE conformity marking, which are intended to be used in the technical harmonisation directives and be designated on the basis of the procedures defined in the Annex to the Agreement. This may be demonstrated through: — Product certification bodies operating according to the requirements of EN 45011 or ISO Guides 28 and 40. — Quality system certification bodies operating according to the requirements of EN 45012 or ISO Guide 62. — Inspection bodies operating according to the requirements of EN 45004 or ISO Guide 39. Conformity assessment bodies will be designated in accordance with the procedures set out in the Annex to the Agreement. Conformity assessment bodies which are Notified Bodies under Annex XI of Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices or Annex VIII of Council Directive 90/385/EEC of 20 June 1990 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to active implantable medicinal devices in conjunction with Council Decision 93/465/EEC of 22 July 1993 concerning the modules for the various phases of the conformity assessment procedures and the rules for the affixing and use of the CE conformity marking, which are intended to be used in the technical harmonisation directives shall be presumed competent to carry out conformity assessment to Australian requirements for those devices and procedures for which they have been correspondingly notified by their competent authorities in Europe.
Sample 1Sample 2
PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES. The procedures to be followed by New Zealand in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against the European Community’s requirements The procedures to be followed by the European Community in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against New Zealand’s requirements The conformity assessment bodies listed in Section II will meet the requirements of the Directives listed in Section I, taking into account Council Decision 93/465/EEC of 22 July 1993 concerning the modules for the various phases of the conformity assessment procedures and the rules for the affixing and use of the CE conformity marking, which are intended to be used in the technical harmonisation directives, and are designated on the basis of the procedures defined in the Annex to the Agreement. This may be demonstrated through: (a) For the purposes of Article 10(5) of Council Directive 89/336/EEC of 3 May 1989 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to electromagnetic compatibility, Inspection Bodies operating according to the requirements of EN 45004 or ISO Guide 39, and either: 1. The procedures for designating conformity assessment bodies will be consistent with the principles and procedures set out in the Annex to the Agreement. 2. The following procedures are deemed to be consistent with those set out in the Annex to the Agreement: Testing Laboratories: — accredited by accreditation bodies which are signatories to the European cooperation for Accreditation (EA) Multilateral Agreement on Calibration and Testing, or — able to demonstrate competence by other means in accordance with Sections A and B of the Annex to the Agreement. — accredited by the Testing Laboratory Registration Council of New Zealand, or — able to demonstrate competence by other means in accordance with Sections A and B of the Annex to the Agreement.
Sample 1Sample 2
PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES. The procedures to be followed by New Zealand in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against the European Community’s requirements The procedures to be followed by the European Community in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against New Zealand’s requirements The conformity assessment bodies listed in Section II will meet the requirements of the Directives listed in Section I, taking into account Council Decision 93/465/EEC of 22 July 1993 concerning the modules for the various phases of the conformity assessment procedures and the rules for the affixing and use of the CE conformity marking, which are intended to be used in the technical harmonisation directives, and are designated on the basis of the procedures defined in the Annex to the Agreement. This may be demonstrated through: (a) For the purpose of Directive 89/392/EEC of 14 June 1989 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to machinery: Inspection Bodies operating to the requirements of EN 45004 or ISO Guide 39, and either — accredited by the Testing Laboratory Registration Council of New Zealand, or — able to demonstrate competence by other means in accordance with Sections A and B of the Annex to the Agreement. 1. The procedures for designating conformity assessment bodies will be consistent with the principles and procedures set out in the Annex to the Agreement. 2. The following procedures are deemed to be consistent with those set out in the Annex to the Agreement: (a) For cranes: For Design Verification, conformity assessment bodies will: — operate in conformity with EN 45004 or ISO Guide 39, and — operate a quality system conforming with ISO 9001, and — employ design verifiers who through qualifications, training and experience can demonstrate that they have the necessary skills and ability to fully understand and apply the detailed requirements of the legislation and standards in which they will operate and with which they are certifying compliance. The procedures to be followed by New Zealand in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against the European Community’s requirements The procedures to be followed by the European Community in designating conformity assessment bodies to assess products against New Zealand’s requirements (b) For the purpose of Council Directives setting out noise limitation requirements for tower cranes: Product Certification Bodies operating according to the requirements ...
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES. SECTION V: ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS
Sample 1

Related to PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES

  • Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.

  • Instructions for Operators This agreement is intended to be provided to an Operator from a LEA. The Operator should fully read the agreement and is requested to complete the below areas of the agreement. Once the Operator accepts the terms of the agreement, the Operator should wet sign the agreement and return it to the LEA. Once the LEA signs the agreement, the LEA should provide a signed copy of the agreement to the Operator. Article/Exhibit Box # Description Cover Page Box # 3 Official Name of Operator Cover Page Box # 4 Date Signed by Operator Recitals Box #5 Contract Title for Service Agreement Recitals Box #6 Date of Service Agreement Article 7 Boxes #7-10 Operator’s designated representative Signature Page Boxes #15-19 Authorized Operator’s representative signature Exhibit A Box #25 Description of services provided Exhibit B All Applicable Boxes  Operator notates if data is collected to provide the described services.  Defines the schedule of data required for the Operator to provide the services outlined in Exhibit A Exhibit D All Applicable Boxes (Optional Exhibit): Defines deletion or return of data expectations by LEA Exhibit E All Applicable Boxes (Optional Exhibit): Operator may, by signing the Form of General Offer of Privacy Terms (General Offer, attached as Exhibit E), be bound by the terms of this DPA to any other Subscribing LEA who signs the acceptance in said Exhibit. Exhibit F Boxes # 25-29 A list of all Subprocessors used by the Operator to perform functions pursuant to the Service Agreement, list security programs and measures, list Operator’s security measures

  • AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES A. Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by AGREEMENT, shall be reviewed by LOCAL AGENCY’S Chief Financial Officer.

  • Updated Information Submission by Interconnection Customer The updated information submission by the Interconnection Customer, including manufacturer information, shall occur no later than one hundred eighty (180) Calendar Days prior to the Trial Operation. The Interconnection Customer shall submit a completed copy of the Electric Generating Unit data requirements contained in Appendix 1 to the LGIP. It shall also include any additional information provided to the Participating TO and the CAISO for the Interconnection Studies. Information in this submission shall be the most current Electric Generating Unit design or expected performance data. Information submitted for stability models shall be compatible with the Participating TO and CAISO standard models. If there is no compatible model, the Interconnection Customer will work with a consultant mutually agreed to by the Parties to develop and supply a standard model and associated information. If the Interconnection Customer's data is materially different from what was originally provided to the Participating TO and the CAISO for the Interconnection Studies, then the Participating TO and the CAISO will conduct appropriate studies pursuant to the LGIP to determine the impact on the Participating TO’s Transmission System and affected portions of the CAISO Controlled Grid based on the actual data submitted pursuant to this Article 24.3. The Interconnection Customer shall not begin Trial Operation until such studies are completed and all other requirements of this LGIA are satisfied.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.