ccording to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), at least 41 Americans were killed and about 133,000 injured between 2017 and 2019 in incidents tied to e-scooters, e-bikes, and hoverboards.1 Ten companies were forced to recall approximately 500,000 hoverboards after the CPSC received about 100 reports of the lithium-ion battery packs that power hoverboards overheating, sparking, smoking, catching fire, or exploding.2
While these examples may represent a small segment of concern, their occurrence highlights the importance of product regulatory compliance and the consequences of failing to integrate compliance considerations into the design, development, production, and distribution of a wide range of products.
The product regulatory compliance process encompasses all of these aspects in the regulation of end products, components, materials, systems, and processes. It chiefly consists of testing an end product to assess its compliance with applicable requirements and receiving certification from a regulatory agency or a self-declaration by the manufacturer that the end product meets these requirements.
Typically, these requirements apply to products that utilize modern electronic technologies. However, many product regulatory requirements address various health, environmental, and safety issues specific to other types of products, including foods and grains, drugs, oils, chemicals, fabrics, cosmetics, etc.
An original equipment manufacturer (OEM) is obligated to test its products to determine their conformity with the applicable standards mandated by the regulatory authority of the country in which the products will be sold or marketed. In many cases, OEMs are also required to obtain independent verification of conformity and receive certification or other form of approval prior to shipping the product to that market. A copy of the certification or other evidence of product approval is generally required to accompany the product when shipped.
Product regulatory compliance is achieved at the product or stock-keeping unit (SKU) level, and marking verifying that compliance is generally required to be visible on the product. In some cases, product regulatory compliance requirements are also applicable to critical components within the product or spare parts that accompany the product when sold. Generally speaking, achieving compliance with component level regulations is the responsibility of the component supplier, and test data verifying component compliance is included in documentation submitted in compliance declarations covering the actual end product.
Relevant regulatory requirements can vary based on a country or jurisdiction, the industry, or the technology used. For electrical and electronic systems, devices, and components, requirements may include, but are not limited to, issues related to safety, electromagnetic compatibility (EMC), radio, telecommunications, energy efficiency, environmental, quality, performance, etc. Further complicating the compliance picture, individual technical requirements can vary from country to country, contributing to the challenges of achieving global regulatory compliance.
In addition to compliance certifications and approvals issued by regulatory authorities, several industry special interest groups (SIGs), consortiums, and alliances, such as the Wi-Fi Alliance, the Zigbee Alliance, and the LoRA Alliance, offer product or technology-specific approvals that allow the use of their logo or other identification on products that have been reviewed and verified for compliance with their technology-specific requirements.
Medical devices and instruments used for important functions are also held to rigid performance standards. A few examples of devices and instruments that must meet performance-related standards include pulmonary and respiratory systems, ventilators, blood pressure measurement devices, intravenous instruments, pediatric tracheostomy tubes, feeding systems, culture media used in microbiology laboratories, certain materials used in the practice of dentistry, patient transfer chairs, and sterile containers, etc.
Many government agencies, including those overseeing aviation and military systems and applications, may also require conformity with specialized performance and quality standards that may not fall within the typical definition of product regulatory compliance but which must be addressed nonetheless. For example, “The U.S. Internal Revenue Service released Notice 2015-4 which specifies the performance and quality standards that small wind turbines must meet in order to qualify for the 30% investment tax credit, and which requires that small wind turbine models be certified …” 3
Consumer and enterprise products requiring access to telecommunications networks operated by mobile phone carriers may have to comply with the requirements developed by Telcordia, a telecommunications standards body. In addition to the Telcordia requirements, carrier-specific requirements are often imposed by network providers like Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Vodafone, Orange, Telstra, etc. Typically, collaborating with the network providers to conduct tests and satisfy such requirements also becomes the responsibility of compliance engineers.
Finally, large e-commerce retailers and distributors may have their own requirements applicable to the products that they procure for sale or distribution that might be more stringent than those imposed by local, regional, or national regulatory authorities.
This process usually follows the following trajectory:
- Core Market Access (CMA): Companies generally first launch new products into their core or primary markets. Meeting the relevant compliance and testing requirements applicable in the EU and/or U.S. and Canada helps to validate the integrity of the product while also establishing a generally accepted baseline conformance to compliance.
- Global Market Access (GMA): Following a successful launch and acceptance of its new product into its core markets, companies then launch their product globally into other countries in succession. Some countries, such as China and India, typically require in-country testing, which requires shipping product samples to a local testing lab for the purpose of testing. Even in those countries where in-country testing is not required and in which regulatory authorities accept test results and approvals obtained in the EU or the U.S., companies may still be required to go through a time-consuming regulatory process, submitting applications and other forms to the relevant government agencies.
- Changes in an underlying standard (or standards) in a given country or jurisdiction may require retesting of the product to the new or revised requirements to either retain approval or receive a new approval.
- In cases in which a country or jurisdiction does not grant lifetime approval for a given product, renewal of an existing certification may be required. Typically, the frequency of such renewals can be anywhere from one to five years from the original approval date.
- A significant change in an existing product design can trigger the need to retest and/or recertify the product.
- A change in a critical component such as a power supply may also require a company to retest and/or recertify the end product.
- In cases in which regulatory authorities require follow-up inspections of the factory (or factories) where a product is produced, the use of a new or different factory may require a review of current product certifications and retesting.
As mentioned earlier, product regulatory compliance is evaluated at the product or SKU level. However, an OEM is required to disclose the list of critical components used in the final product. As part of the overall evaluation of the end product, some regulatory authorities may require evidence of safety testing and certification of those critical components. If a critical component is sourced from more than one supplier, (typically is the case for the purpose of managing the supply chain risk), evidence of safety testing and certification from all suppliers may be required.
Product regulatory compliance requirements play a significant role in your ability to ship your company’s products to foreign and domestic customers. Having sufficient evidence demonstrating your product’s compliance with applicable regulations to support a factory audit or to accompany your product when shipped requires verifying the validity, quality, and availability of your regulatory compliance documentation. Organizing that documentation and designating a secure location for it is also an obvious and commonplace practice that is essential to support the uninterrupted shipment of goods.
In many cases, early testing on product prototypes against the limits set forth in applicable technical standards will pinpoint issues that may lead to non-conformity. Waiting until the product design has been completed to conduct testing almost always results in the need to redesign the product and to conduct regression testing on the updated design to verify its compliance. This inevitably leads to delays in bringing your product to market and increases the overall development cost for the product.
The best approach involves the development of marketing waves, that is, segmenting individual countries into groups to be given priority in the initial product rollouts to customers. The success of this wave approach ultimately requires the product regulatory group to develop a clear plan that accurately accounts for the time required for the testing and approval phases in individual jurisdictions so that product approvals coincide with the planned market availability. This regulatory compliance plan should be fully transparent to the entire product development team and the marketing team so that the necessary distribution channels can be established or verified as operational.
Here are just some examples:
- Safety and well-being: A lack of conformity may result put the safety and well-being of people at risk. According to the CPSC, in 2019, there were an estimated 22,500 treadmill-related injuries treated at U.S. emergency departments among all ages (of which around 2,000 were children under eight years of age).
- Revenue impact: It is all too common for companies to miss quarterly or annual revenue targets because they could not ship orders on hand from available inventory due to a lack of compliance documentation availability. We know of incidents in which a distributor could not bring inventory into a target market because the products were being delayed at customs due to a lack of compliance approval documentation. As a result, the OEM could not register the necessary revenue recognition during a fiscal quarter, falling short of both the company’s and investors’ expectations.
- Customer satisfaction: Missing an order commitment date due to lack of regulatory approval directly impacts customer satisfaction, a critical metric to business success. Note that an OEM customer may be a reseller, distributor, system integrator, or end customer.
- Brand impact: Recalls from the market due to poor quality and performance may adversely impact the OEM brand. The bad press from an incident can be devastating to a company’s reputation, from which it may never recover. In the infamous hoverboard issue cited previously in this article, more than ten companies were forced to recall 100,000 hoverboards after the CPSC received about 100 reports of the lithium-ion battery packs that power hoverboards overheating, sparking, smoking, catching fire, or exploding.
- Legal impact: Typically, good business practices dictate that a company secures product liability insurance prior to placing the product on the market. Generally speaking, product liability insurance premiums for a product that meets all of the applicable regulatory requirements will be significantly less than that paid for a non-compliant product or a product that has no proof of compliance. If a non-compliant product is introduced into a market and an event occurs that brings a safety issue to light, there can be many ramifications that directly affect the company, including fines and possible jail time for those responsible.
- https://www.cbsnews.com/news/e-scooter-hoverboard-e-bike-deaths-41-last-3-years by Kate Gibson, September 17, 2020, CBS News, Moneywatch.
- https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2016/self-balancing-scooters-hoverboards-recalled-by-10-firms
- https://www.a2la.org/regulators/domestic-recognitions
- https://abcnews.go.com/US/consumer-regulatory-agency-issues-urgent-warning-peloton-treadmill/story?id=77138617#:~:text=In%202019%2C%20there%20were%20an,5%2Dyear%2Dold%20child