Advolo C-Corp: a New York company with EU safety engineers
Advolo C-Corp is a New York company. We work in two directions: American machines entering the European market, and European machines entering the American one.
That is the whole of it, and it is worth stating plainly because most compliance suppliers work in one direction only. A U.S. certification body knows the American system and tells you to find someone in Europe. A European consultancy knows CE marking and cannot tell you what your existing UL file is worth. We are on both sides of that gap, which is where our clients keep losing time.
Two companies, and why that is the point
Not an organisational detail. It is the reason the arrangement works:
The contract is American. Advolo C-Corp is our U.S. contracting entity in New York. You contract under U.S. law, in dollars, with an entity in your own jurisdiction and your own business hours. Your legal department does not have to review a cross-border services agreement to buy a risk assessment.
The engineering is European. The work is done by the engineers of Advolo srl — the people who do this in the market that will inspect your machine, reading the directives in their own working language, in the same time zone as the Notified Bodies and the authorities you may end up dealing with.
And the two companies are one team, not two suppliers. You are not being handed from one firm to another, and you are not choosing between them: you contract once, in New York, and the engineers in Italy do the work.
And the European entity is a legal fact you may need. Regulation (EU) 2019/1020, Article 4, allows a machine to be placed on the EU market only if there is an economic operator established in the Union who holds the Declaration of Conformity, can produce the technical documentation on request, and answers the authorities. A U.S. manufacturer has no choice about whether someone in Europe does that. The choice is only about who.
About our New York address
Our U.S. address is a business address in Manhattan. It is where the American company is domiciled and where you contract with us — it is not an engineering office, and there is no laboratory behind it.
We say so for two reasons. The first is that it is true and easy to check, and a supplier who is vague about their own address is not a supplier you want handling the documentation an authority will ask you for. The second is that the alternative is worse: a company that implies an American engineering operation and then hands the technical work to people in Europe has told you something about how it will describe the rest of the project.
What you are buying is European safety engineering under an American contract. That is the whole proposition, and it does not need a photograph of a building.
What we are not
We are not a Notified Body. We cannot issue an EC type-examination certificate, and neither can anyone who offers to sell you a “CE certificate”.
We are not an NRTL. We do not list or label products for the United States, and we do not issue certification marks.
We do not sign your Declaration of Conformity. The manufacturer signs it.
There is a commercial consequence, and we would rather state our interest than claim we have none. We are paid for engineering work either way: when a Notified Body or an NRTL is involved, we are paid to build the file and run that interface; when one is not, we are paid for the assessment that takes its place. What we cannot do is issue the certificate — so whether you need one is decided by the law, not by us: Article 12 and Annex IV of Directive 2006/42/EC today, Article 25 and Annex I Part A of Regulation (EU) 2023/1230 from 20 January 2027. It is never ours to sell. Every route we give you carries the article it comes from. That is the thing to check, not our incentive.
What we work on
Selling into the European Union. CE marking for machinery under Directive 2006/42/EC and, from 20 January 2027, Regulation (EU) 2023/1230: risk assessment, technical file, Declaration of Conformity, Notified Body interface. Alongside machinery, the directives that usually arrive with it — ATEX for equipment in explosive atmospheres, the Pressure Equipment Directive, and functional safety to EN ISO 13849 or EN 62061.
Selling into the United States and Canada. NFPA 79 and EN 60204-1 side by side, UL 508A control panels and their short-circuit current rating, NRTL listing and field evaluation, OSHA and ANSI B11, FDA registration for laser products, SEMI S2/S8 for semiconductor equipment — through to the Site Acceptance Test.
And the documentation itself. AdPro X is our own platform for keeping technical documentation, certifications and compliance deadlines in one place, with the file structured the way an auditor expects to find it.
How we write what we publish
When we state a legal requirement, we give you the article it comes from. That is a working method, not a style choice, and it has three parts:
- Primary sources only. Directives and regulations are read in the official text; U.S. federal requirements in the Code of Federal Regulations, the Federal Register and the agencies’ own interpretation letters. Not in someone’s summary of them.
- Every claim is registered and signed off. Each page on this site has a claim register behind it — one line per regulatory statement, with its source and its verification status — and it is reviewed by an engineer before the page goes live.
- Standards are cited, never reproduced. NFPA 79, UL 508A, EN 60204-1, ANSI B11.0 and the CSA standards are copyrighted documents. We tell you which clause applies and what it means for your machine. We do not republish their text, and a compliance supplier who does is showing you how they treat other people’s intellectual property.
If you find something on this site that you can show to be wrong, tell us — that is the most useful message we can receive, and it will be corrected.
The people
The work is done by safety engineers employed by Advolo srl. Your contact is the engineer who read your file — not an account manager relaying answers between you and someone you never speak to.
The first conversation is a technical one
Tell us what the machine does and where it is going. What comes back is the route — which directives apply, whether a third party is involved, and what you already have that counts as evidence. If the honest answer is that you need less than you were told, that is the answer you will get.