I would like to thank Rich Nute his very well structured ideas. I agree that first, it's necessary an unified standards system and IEC may be that system. The CB scheme looks like the right way to start with.
However, I consider it is necessary a real free market, that free market our countries are claiming for other aspects of trade. That means that the CB scheme or any other global solution, should state a technical level high enough, to assure a result good enough, and control the tests houses and certification organizations by means of a really good accreditation system all over the world. The accreditation criteria should be exclusively based on technical reasons, so hard as it was necessary, with no political influence. This is not the picture nowadays. In almost all the countries, we can find private companies that are working in the tests and certification market as a monopoly, nominated by the political power. No other company can be introduced in that market, and all the movements we can see now can change the situation. Even the EU Directives maintains the concept of politically nominated Notified Bodies (the EU recommends a minimum technical level for the NB, but it is not mandatory if they have the political approbation). The CB scheme only works with the "official" organization in every country (UL in USA, VDE in Germany, etc.). For example, all the German TUV's are outside the CB scheme. Are they technically competent? I think it is not necessary to defend here how good may be a real free market (small prices, fast service, best clients attention, etc.). But companies that have the monopoly at present are moving to avoid it. Juan P. Pena --------- 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).
