We do witness testing with UL for UL1950. We haven't gotten into other standards yet. The greatest advantage is the quicker approval. If you send your unit to UL, it sits in a "Q" until its turn. With witness testing, there is no "Q" and UL schedules the testing quickly. If you request an early authorization for shipment, you can get a letter at the end of the testing which authorizes you to ship before the UL file is complete. This assumes no problems during the testing. The cost is greater. The UL fee is about the same either way; however, you must pay our fee as well.
-----Original Message----- From: Gary Labadie <[email protected]> To: [email protected] <[email protected]> List-Post: [email protected] Date: Monday, July 13, 1998 6:05 PM Subject: Witness Testing >I am interested in the pro's and con's of using a third party test lab >for UL3101 witness testing to obtain Underwriter's Laboratories(UL) >approval versus going to UL directly. Has anyone gone done this path? >I would be interested in what agencies you worked with and unforeseen >problems or delays that occurred in the process. Also the impression >you had of using a third party "agent". In the end, is it better to >just go with UL or go through an agent/consultant to help speed up the >approval process. CE (product safety side) and UL listing is my end >goal for my products. EMC side of life is already taken care of. Any >thoughts or comments are appreciated. > >Best Regards, > >Gary Labadie >Approvals Coordinator > >Acromag, Inc. >30765 Wixom Rd. Ph: (248)624-1541 ext. 205 >P.O. Box 437 Fax:(248)624-9234 >Wixom, MI 48393 Email: [email protected] >
