For the US, the questions are equipment class, responsible party and module evidence. This checklist names the requests and the red flags. Planning input, not legal advice.
The US route differs from the CE family in shape: instead of a declaration backed by a technical file, it runs on equipment authorization with a responsible party named in the United States. Buyers coming from the EU side expect the wrong documents; this page names the right ones, per the destination contrast in the market requirements page.
| Item | What it should show | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Equipment class statement | Unintentional radiator for powered units; intentional radiator for WiFi models | Determines the authorization route |
| Authorization evidence | Certification (for intentional radiators) or SDoC-style documentation, with the responsible party named in the US | The legal anchor of the listing |
| Test reports | Per product model, lab-identified, with sample identity | Evidence behind the authorization |
| WiFi module documentation | Module grant and integration guidance for connected models | Modular approval depends on installation per the grant |
| Labeling artwork | The required statements on the product and manual | A compliance element, not decoration |
Ask which authorization route applies per model at the RFQ, per the RFQ guide. File the evidence per model and destination alongside the CE set, indexed as in the test reports page, and re-confirm after any board or module change, the change-control discipline from the vetting questionnaire.
Send your mechanism type, capacity and certification need — we match a verified factory and return a consolidated quotation.
Request a Quote