Certification questions decide industrial projects. A warehouse automation programme that has cleared its functional specification can still stall in procurement because a compliance team needs a specific mark, for a specific model, for a specific market — and "the datasheet lists the standards" does not answer the question.
This guide explains what each mark on an industrial wireless charging system actually covers, which market it applies to, and how to check a supplier's claims before you commit. It is written for the engineers, integrators and procurement teams who have to sign off on a charging installation, not as a substitute for your own compliance review.
Certification is per model and per market, not per brand
The single most common misunderstanding is treating certification as a property of the supplier. It is not. A certificate is issued for a specific product model, tested against a specific standard edition, for a specific market.
That has three practical consequences:
- A standards list is not a certificate. A datasheet line reading "UL 1564, CE, RoHS" tells you which standards the product was designed and tested against. It is not the certificate. Ask for the document itself.
- Marks differ between models in the same range. Two charging systems from one supplier, with similar power ratings, can hold different marks — because they were designed for different markets or assessed under different standards. Always check the specific model.
- The destination market decides what you need. A system specified for a European site and the same system specified for a US site may need different documentation, even if the hardware is identical.
Once you know that, the marks themselves are straightforward to read.
UL 1564 and CSA C22.2 No. 107.2-01: the North American safety listing
UL 1564 is the UL standard covering industrial battery chargers. It addresses the charger as industrial equipment — construction, electrical safety, protection against fault conditions — rather than making claims about battery performance. Its Canadian counterpart is CAN/CSA-C22.2 No. 107.2-01, the CSA standard for battery chargers.
For a project in the United States or Canada, this is the certification a compliance team is most likely to look for on an industrial charging system, because it maps directly to what the equipment is. If your site is subject to an authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) inspection, this listing is what that inspector will recognise.
In North America these two standards are normally covered by a single listing. The most common form is cTÜVus, the mark of TÜV Rheinland of North America — an OSHA-recognised National Recognised Testing Laboratory (NRTL). The "c" and "us" either side of the mark indicate that one certificate covers both Canada and the United States, which is why a North American charging installation usually shows one mark rather than a separate UL and CSA listing.
That distinction matters commercially. An NRTL listing authorises the holder to place the mark on the certified unit, and it carries ongoing factory follow-up inspections — the certificate is maintained, not issued once. When a supplier claims an NRTL mark, the certificate states which models are covered and that surveillance applies.
One point worth being precise about: UL 1564 applies to the charger. It does not certify your installation, your site wiring or your battery. Those fall under other requirements and under your own electrical design.
FCC Part 15 and Part 18: how a wireless charger is assessed
A wireless charging system is not a single radio device, so the FCC rules that apply depend on which part of it is being assessed. Three routes commonly appear on the same system:
- Part 15 Subpart B — unintentional radiators. The charger's control electronics, switching power stages and digital circuitry. This is a conformity route and does not produce an FCC ID.
- Part 15 Subpart C — intentional low-power transmitters. The 2.4 GHz link that a wireless charging system uses for control and communication falls here, and this is the route that issues an FCC ID.
- Part 18 — industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) equipment that intentionally generates RF energy for a purpose other than communication. High-power wireless power transfer sits here, because the transmitter's whole job is to radiate a field.
Because these are different assessments, two systems from the same supplier can legitimately show different FCC evidence. One may hold FCC ID grants for its radio controllers; another may hold a Part 15 Subpart B and Part 18 conformity certificate with no FCC ID at all. Neither is incomplete — they are different routes to compliance for designs whose radio architecture differs.
Two conditions appear on power-transfer certifications and are worth checking against your installation. The first is professional installation: the equipment must be installed by a competent installer rather than sold for plug-in consumer use. The second is an RF exposure separation distance, typically 20 cm, which the installer has to maintain. Both are installation obligations that sit with whoever commissions the site, not with the charger alone.
CE marking: what actually backs it
CE marking is the one most often misread in both directions — dismissed as meaningless by some buyers, overclaimed by some suppliers. The accurate position sits between the two.
CE is not issued by an EU authority. It is the manufacturer's declaration that the product conforms to the applicable EU directives, and the legal document behind it is a signed Declaration of Conformity naming the directives and the harmonised standards applied. That part is true of every CE-marked product.
What varies — and what is usually left out — is which directive applies and how conformity was demonstrated. For a wireless charging system the answer is normally the Radio Equipment Directive, 2014/53/EU (RED), because the system contains a radio link. RED is the directive that governs it, not the EMC Directive alone.
Under RED a manufacturer has a genuine choice. They can self-declare by applying the relevant harmonised standards in full, or they can involve a Notified Body — an organisation designated by an EU member state to assess conformity. When a Notified Body is used, the CE mark rests on a third-party assessment of the type, not on the manufacturer's paperwork alone.
For these charging systems, the CE marking is backed by a Certificate of Conformity issued by TÜV Rheinland LGA Products GmbH, a Notified Body, certifying conformity to the essential requirements of RED Article 3 against a listed set of harmonised EN standards — including EN 62477-1 for safety, EN 300 440 for the radio, and the EN 301 489 and EN 55011 series for EMC. That is a materially stronger position than a bare self-declaration, and it is the reason a supplier's CE claim is worth interrogating: which CE it is tells you what you are actually relying on.
One limitation is stated on the certificate itself and is worth understanding. It confirms conformity of the type; it does not imply assessment of production, and it does not permit the use of a TÜV Rheinland mark of conformity. So the CE certificate is not the same instrument as the North American listing described above, and it should not be presented as one.
Two TÜV Rheinland documents, two different jobs
This is where "TÜV certified" becomes ambiguous, because a single certification body issues more than one kind of document and they carry different weight. On these charging systems, two appear:
| cTÜVus listing | CE Certificate of Conformity | |
|---|---|---|
| Issued by | TÜV Rheinland of North America (NRTL) | TÜV Rheinland LGA Products GmbH (Notified Body) |
| Certifies | UL 1564 and CSA C22.2 No. 107.2-01 safety | Conformity to RED Article 3 (2014/53/EU) |
| Mark on the product | Yes — the holder is authorised to apply the mark | No — the certificate expressly does not permit a TÜV mark |
| Production surveillance | Yes — regular factory follow-up inspections | No — type conformity only, no production assessment |
Neither is better; they do different jobs for different regulators. But when a supplier says "TÜV certified", the useful follow-up question is which TÜV document, because a type-conformity certificate and an NRTL listing are not interchangeable evidence. Ask for the certificate and read the four rows above off it.
RoHS, REACH and TSCA: materials compliance
These are frequently listed alongside the safety and EMC marks, but they answer a different question — what is inside the product, not how it behaves.
- RoHS restricts hazardous substances — lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, PBBs, PBDEs and four phthalates — in electrical and electronic equipment under Directive 2011/65/EU as amended by (EU) 2015/863. It is demonstrated by testing, and the result is a test report showing each parameter below its limit, not a certificate of design intent.
- REACH regulates chemicals placed on the EU market, including substances of very high concern above defined thresholds. It covers the product and its supply chain.
- TSCA is the United States Toxic Substances Control Act, which regulates chemical substances in products placed on the US market. It appears on North America–focused documentation rather than EU documentation.
Neither RoHS, REACH nor TSCA is a safety or performance mark, and they do not travel as a set. A system may carry a RoHS test report and a REACH statement and no TSCA declaration, or REACH alone. Check the specific model's documentation rather than assuming the group moves together.
What ONEPOINTECH's charging systems hold
Certificates are issued per model and per market. These are the documents held for each system:
| Certification | LC180-A30 (1.5 kW) | LS300-A60 (3 kW) |
|---|---|---|
| North America safety cTÜVus — UL 1564:2024; CAN/CSA-C22.2 No. 107.2-01 + GI1 + GI2 | Certificate CU 72501295 0001 Report CN254EMB 001 Issued 2025-08-15 | Certificate CU 72405613 0001 Report CN24FNO0 001 Issued 2024-07-04 |
| European Union CE — Radio Equipment Directive 2014/53/EU | TÜV Rheinland CoC AK 50695437 0001 Issued 2025-09-15 | TÜV Rheinland CoC AK 50637788 0001 Issued 2024-07-24 |
| United States radio FCC | FCC ID 2BH87-LC180A30TC FCC ID 2BH87-LC180A30RC Part 15 Subpart C, 2402–2480 MHz | FCC Part 15 Subpart B:2023 FCC Part 18:2023 CoC AK 50650552 0001 |
| Canada ISED | IC 32872-LC180A30TC IC 32872-LC180A30RC RSS-210 Issue 11 | ICES-001:2020 CoC AK 50646751 0001 |
| Materials | RoHS (test report (9325)223-1221, PASS), REACH, TSCA | REACH |
The two systems are certified by genuinely different routes, and that is worth understanding rather than smoothing over. The LC180-A30's radio controllers are separately certified transmitters with their own FCC and ISED identifiers, so a compliance team can look them up directly in the FCC and ISED databases. The LS300-A60 is assessed as ISM equipment, with Part 18 and ICES-001 conformity evidenced by certificate rather than by an FCC ID.
Both are supplied with their documentation, and we provide the conformity documentation for the model and destination market you are ordering for as part of the project. Tell us where the installation is going and which configuration you need, and we will confirm exactly which marks apply and supply the supporting documents.
Confirm the required documentation against your own compliance process and the authority responsible for local approval. A mark on a datasheet is the starting point for that review, not a replacement for it.
How to verify a supplier's certification claims
Whatever supplier you are evaluating, these checks separate a documented claim from a marketing one:
- Ask for the document, not the line item. Request the certificate, listing or Declaration of Conformity. A supplier who holds them can send them; a datasheet row costs nothing to write. A certificate number is only meaningful if you can see the certificate it belongs to.
- Match the model designation exactly. Certificates name every model they cover, and they name them in full — including variant suffixes. Check that list against the unit on your quote. A certificate covering one variant does not automatically cover another. Expect a manufacturer's own model prefix and variant letters on the certificate that differ from the sales name — that is normal, and what has to match is the base model and the specific variant you are ordering.
- Check the market. An NRTL listing does not satisfy an EU requirement, and a CE declaration does not satisfy an AHJ in the United States. Confirm the certificate covers where the equipment is going.
- Check the standard edition and date. Standards are revised. A certificate against a superseded edition may not reflect the current requirement.
- Check whether it carries surveillance. An NRTL listing is maintained through factory follow-up inspections; a type-conformity certificate is not. Both are legitimate, but they are not the same assurance, and the certificate states which you are getting.
Two of the documents above can be checked independently, without asking the supplier for anything. The FCC ID grants can be looked up in the FCC's equipment authorisation database, and the ISED certificates in Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada's radio equipment list. Public register entries are the strongest form of verification available to a buyer, because they do not depend on the supplier's cooperation.
The same discipline applies to the configuration you are buying. Coil variant, enclosure rating and input voltage range can all change what was tested, so confirm the certificate covers the build you are ordering rather than the base model.
What to ask before ordering
Gather these before you request a quote, and the certification conversation becomes a document exchange rather than an open question:
- Destination market — country, and whether the site is subject to AHJ inspection.
- Required marks — what your compliance team or end customer has specified.
- Model and configuration — including coil variant and enclosure.
- Documentation needed — certificate, Declaration of Conformity, RoHS test report, REACH or TSCA statements, or test reports.
- Installation conditions — whether professional installation is available, and whether the RF exposure separation distance can be maintained on site.
- Battery details — chemistry, voltage range and charge current limit, since these determine whether the system is applicable at all.
Send those to our engineering team and we will confirm which system fits, which marks it holds, and what documentation ships with it.
Review the systems directly:
- LC180-A30 wireless charging system — 1.5 kW, 18–60V, 30A
- LS300-A60 wireless charging system — 3 kW, 42–58V, 60A
Email info@onepointech.com with your destination market and required marks, or contact ONEPOINTECH and we will send the documentation for your configuration. For the wider system picture, see the industrial wireless charging range and how wireless charging technology works.
Important: Certification requirements depend on the model, configuration and destination market, and on the rules of the authority responsible for local approval. Certificate numbers and standards listed here are those held at the date of publication and are subject to revision. Always confirm the required documentation for your specific project.