Actually, the following NRTLs are approved by OSHA for evaluation to UL 1950:
UL, CSA, ITS (former ETL), TUV Rheinland, MET, and SGS. There may be some I have overlooked. George Alspaugh ---------------------- Forwarded by George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark on 11/22/99 08:09 AM --------------------------- vgorodetsky%[email protected] on 11/19/99 04:57:29 PM Please respond to vgorodetsky%[email protected] To: George_Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark@LEXMARK, emc-pstc%[email protected] cc: (bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: RE: NRTL acceptance Terry and George, In this country of ours, there are three equally acceptable safety marks: UL, ETL and NRTL. But, as we all know, some acceptable marks are more equal than others. > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [SMTP:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, November 19, 1999 11:02 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: NRTL acceptance > > > Terry, > > You have raised a very good question. The problem is that the U.S. > had only one approved safety agency for so long, that it is > difficult to wean non-laymen away from that one agency mark. This > includes your (and my) management, marketing, customers, etc. Few > of these understand the meaning of NRTL, with its variety of agency > approvals and marks. > > I did fight this battle over an off-the-shelf peripheral we needed > to market which did not have the "traditional" safety mark, but an > acceptable NRTL mark. One of the positions I to confront was that > many Federal, state, or local "government" bids require "the" mark. > > I referenced the Code of Federal Regulations, OSHA sections, citing > acceptable U.S. authorized NRTLs. I pointed out that compliance to > UL 1950 was the needed requirement, not which agency did the actual > assessment. One problem is that those who write the specifications > for government bids are not aware of this fact, and do continue to > list only one agency mark into the document. In a way, this is > probably a violation of federal law, i.e. requiring vendors to do > "business" with a specified private company, thus stifling any > competition. Isn't this what the goverment is accusing Microsoft > of doing? > > You are exactly right. As PSE professionals, we should be able to > look for and use whatever options are legally available to meet our > employer's certification needs in the most timely and cost effective > manner. Unfortunately, in the U.S. this requires a significant > amount of internal and external education as to the actual legal > options. > > George Alspaugh > Lexmark International Inc. > > ---------------------- Forwarded by George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark on > 11/19/99 > 01:41 PM --------------------------- > > tjmeck%[email protected] on 11/19/99 12:25:38 PM > > Please respond to tjmeck%[email protected] > > To: emc-pstc%[email protected] > cc: (bcc: George Alspaugh/Lex/Lexmark) > Subject: NRTL acceptance > > > > > Hi: > > We have been using an old reliable but very busy Safety agency to > review our products and apply their safety mark. > > From time to time we are approached by their competitors, NRTLs, or > European soon to be NRTL labs for our business. > > My question is in this `NRTL enlightened market are there still > inspectors out there that will still require education about the NRTL > status and the acceptability of an NRTL lab Listing vs the old familiar > ones? > > As you all know time to market is critical and 3 to 6 months is too > long to wait. We will need to look for other solutions and I am trying > to review the whole range of issues involved in changing the primary > NRTL. > > I hope this is not too commercial a question! If you feel it is please > reply to me directly. > > Thank you! > > > Best regards, > Terry J. Meck > Senior Compliance/Test Engineer > Phone:215-721-5280 > Fax:215-721-5551 hard copy; > Fax PC: 215.799.1650 To my desk PC > [email protected] > Accu-Sort Systems Inc. > 511 School House Rd. > Telford, PA 18969-1196 USA > > > > --------- > 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). --------- 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).
