Hi Vitaly! The recent agreement between CSA and TUV Rheinland was not to allow us to issue c- type marks (i posted an earlier comment on that).
The agreement established a working relationship allowing CSA to easily offer TUV Rheinland GS licenses, and TUV Rheinland to easily offer CSA marks as part of integrated projects. I can fill you in on the Gory Details if you wish. Frank West Sr. Engineer TUV Rheinland NA --- "Gorodetsky, Vitaly" <[email protected]> wrote: > > George, > Do I have to feel sorry about opening this Pandora's > Box (I seem to > originate this turn in discussion)? I meant to make > innocuous remark > (referring to Orwell). Everyone benefits from > clarification. > > c-ETL is perfectly OK. As to NRTL mark(s), I know > of recent agreement > between TUV Rheinland and CSA but have not seen the > c-version of the mark > yet. Hope someone from CSA would clarify for all of > us who is recognized CO > and who is not. > > Best Regards > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > [SMTP:[email protected]] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 5:02 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: RE: NRTL acceptance > > > > > > S. William, > > > > Thanks for the words on COs and TOs and SCCs. > Apparantly UL is one or > > more of these, as the c-UL mark is legally > acceptable in Canada. > > > > Now, what other COs has the SCC accredited to > issue an approved Canadian > > mark? Not CSA, but alternatives to CSA? > > > > George > > > > ---------------------- Forwarded by George > Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark on > > 11/23/99 > > 07:57 AM --------------------------- > > > > swilliam%[email protected] on > 11/22/99 05:02:15 PM > > > > To: George_Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark@LEXMARK > > cc: > emc-pstc%[email protected] > (bcc: George > > Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark) > > Subject: RE: NRTL acceptance > > > > > > > > George, Canada is not as straight forward as that. > There is not a mutual > > agreement. In order for a lab to issue a Canadian > Approval Mark, the lab > > must be accredited as a CO(Certifying > Organization) by the SCC(Standards > > Council of Canada). The CO must use data that has > come from a TO(Testing > > Organization) that is also accredited by the SCC. > Most labs that issue > > their Canada Mark are both a CO and TO so it is > very easy for them. The > > critical item is that the product has to have been > tested against the > > relevant Canadian National Standard(very easy for > ITE as 1950 is a joint > > standard). > > If you want to do everything by the book, your US > Mark should be from an > > NRTL certified by OSHA to the standards that apply > to your product and the > > Canadian Mark must be from a CO accredited by the > SCC. > > > > > > Please respond to [email protected] > > > > To: [email protected] > > cc: (bcc: Steve Williams/SDD/NAM/APCC) > > From: [email protected] on 11/22/99 03:42 PM > > Subject: RE: NRTL acceptance > > > > > > I tried to recall NRTLs that were approved for > asessments of ITE to > > UL1950. I did not overlook MET (listed in my > note), but may have > > missed NTS which may fit this description. I'm > not sure the others > > are sanctioned for listing of ITE under UL1950. > > > > There are many NTRLs, including UL. There is no > "NRTL" mark, as all > > NRTLs are legally equal. The mark of some NRTLs > has included the > > letters "NRTL" as part of their mark, apparantly > by choice. The > > CSA/NRTL mark is an example. To my knowledge, the > use of "NRTL" in > > an agency's mark is not mandatory. CSA has > recently changed their > > mark to drop the "NRTL" and simply show the CSA > mark with "US" > > subscript for assessment to the U.S. stadnard. > > > > However, Canada does not recognize the U.S. NRTLs > to assess an ITE > > product to the Canadian standard. There is a > mutual agreement between > > Canada and the U.S. that "allows" a UL assessment > to the Canadian ITE > > safety standard. This results in the UL mark with > a subscript "C", > > often called the "c-UL" mark. It is my > understanding that when the > > Canadian government bids out ITE for its own use, > they tend to prefer > > the CSA mark over the c-UL mark. This seems to > violate the "spirit" > > of the agreement, but who can force them to do > otherwise? > > > > George Alspaugh > > > > (Some or all of the above may reveal ignorance on > my part, which can > > be "cured" by more enlightened appends to follow.) > > > > > > > > > > --------- > > 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], [email protected], or > > [email protected] (the list > administrators). > > > > --------- > 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], [email protected], or > [email protected] (the list > administrators). > > > ===== Frank West Senior Engineer TUV Rheinland of North America NW/Portland OR Office __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. Yahoo! Shopping. --------- 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], [email protected], or [email protected] (the list administrators).
