Hello from San Diego:
1. Consultation and certification.
Moshe Valdman asks whether consultations by a safety certifier is an
unhealthy situation.
Since safety certification is determined by compliance to a
published standard, I don't believe this is an "unhealthy"
situation. The construction either complies with the standard or it
doesn't.
If the consultation involves areas of interpretation of the
standard, then who is to say whether the intepretation is correct?
The one issuing the certification determines the "correctness" of
the interpretation. Often, in such a case, interpretations differ
between certifiers. Consultation activity is not going to affect
interpretations one way or the other. Consultation may even help
to solve intepretation problems.
So, in my opinion, the use of a standard largely eliminates any
"unhealthy" effects of consultation on safety certification.
2. Fixed-price certification.
Moshe Valdman asks whether fixed-price certifications by a safety
certifier is an unhealthy situation.
A certifier should be reasonably expert at setting prices for
certification services. The certifier should be able to set prices
such that the price covers all the time necessary to certify the
product. Hopefully, he will do the "proper" certification job
regardless whether he charges too little or too much.
I think the nature of the job together with the nature of the
clients is such that certifiers will lose money on some jobs, and
make excessive profits on other jobs. In the end, it should average
out so that in the long run the certifier makes a reasonable return
over and above his costs.
Often, the certifier has the opportunity to adjust his price as he
proceeds with the job.
A certifier who would compromise his work because he estimated too
little money for the job would be entirely unethical and immoral.
It wouldn't be long before he was out of business.
Personally, I don't see this issue as being any different for any
sort of contractor who agrees to do a job for a pre-determined price.
Unfortunately, electronic producdt safety has not yet evolved to an
engineering discipline. We continue to rely on standards and
certification house opinions rather than to rely on engineering
analyses. Without an understanding of basic safety principles, we must
rely on the standards and the certification houses for passing judgement
on the safety of our products.
Imagine what the designers and manufacturers of the Golden Gate Bridge
would have to go through if they relied on a "Bridge Safety Standard"
and a third-party certification house!
Best regards,
Rich
-------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Nute Quality Department
Hewlett-Packard Company Product Regulations Group
San Diego Division (SDD) Tel : 619 655 3329
16399 West Bernardo Drive FAX : 619 655 4979
San Diego, California 92127 e-mail: [email protected]
-------------------------------------------------------------
ps: Unlike other high structures (e.g. CN Tower, Space Needle, Empire
State Building) the Golden Gate Bridge has no fences or nets to
impede or prevent suicides. In the local paper this week was an
article reporting the successful results of an anti-suicide patrol
on the bridge.
