We are getting a little out of hand here. My goal is not to
attack any of the NRTL's. It is to participate in a conversation about
how a single mark could be obtained - from any NRTL of your choice - big
or little, but just one of them. The requirements in the standards must
be made based on the real world situation and engineering judgement,
evaluation and continued investigation into what hazards are occurring
and how they can be prevented.
I will back any NRTL that can do that. I also have to recognize
that this is going to take awhile. That doesn't mean that we don't have
the right or even the obligation to make our frustration known. Many of
these NRTL's have people who's job is not to evaluate individual
products but to look at the big picture and these are the people that
should be reading these messages and getting the idea that they can be
the cause for great frustration and additional unnecessary product cost.
If the discussion can't be held to a business level, the helpful
debate is gone, and I no longer want to spend the time to continue the
discourse. I will be happy to participate in any manner I am capable of
achieving the overall goal, but not the sorting out of which NRTL's is
our least favorite. When I have a problem with the NRTL, and I have, I
am not beyond jumping on their management - I have done that as well. If
you ask me the type of service I get from one of them I will tell you
that as well, but I don't to lynch any of them - at least not right now.
In most cases I have found friends and colleagues within the
NRTL's that I deal with. Occasionally, I will find an individual that
needs to have their lungs forcible removed - but they are the exception
and I have the tools to deal with them.
Our expressed desire to have to submit to only one of the NRTL's
around the world is valid. It is worth doing and it is possible.
However, we have to realize that it takes time and pressure to get it
done. Let's focus on pressuring the standards body into either making
the standards the same - Sweden and monitors, Germany and the GS mark
are sticking out like a sore thumb - or when the deviations can't be
eliminated such as those dealing with how the power system is wired at
least allow a single cost effective product configuration.
Those that have non-standard deviations need to first convince the rest
of the world they are correct. Until then we shouldn't have to get
special marks from them. Those are, in my mind, the reasons that we
can't just submit to a single entity one time for global acceptance.
Our perceptions of the individual NRTL's, especially those that don't
have the infrastructure to participate in the standards building process
is probably more of an individual pursuit.
Finally, it should be noted that the process has at least shrunk from
three very different standards, UL, CSA, and VDE down to two - either UL
or CSA. (Please I don't want to hear about the other NRTL's - I know
you're there I do watch to see how you can help me and I know that you
have a growing customer base, I just don't happen to be one of them -
yet)
Gary McInturff
---------
This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list.
To cancel your subscription, send mail to [email protected]
with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the
quotes). For help, send mail to [email protected],
[email protected], or [email protected] (the list
administrators).
