I don't think anyone is dictating to ANSI that they must adopt IEC standards; however, both ESDA and IEEE Working Groups that I belong to have been told that they must harmonize with IEC wherever practical to do so... (ANSI adopts and publishes standards written by both ESDA and IEEE).
(I think I said, "ANSI and others have been told...", but really meant: "Those writing standards for ANSI and others have been told...".) I suspect the pressure to harmonize comes down from ANSI with pressure from industry and (indirectly) from the government to adopt one set of international standards. A number of years ago, I attended a couple of meetings in New York and Washington that involved people from the US State Department, FCC, ANSI and the EU where the topic of discussion was reciprocity agreements where we would accept testing done by European Test Labs and Europe would accept testing done by US Labs. In order to achieve this, it seemed to be agreed that both would adhere to international standards as the basis of testing and test data.... I'm only guessing, but this was probably the beginning of the pressure on US standards development organizations to start the harmonization process..... Best Regards, Michael Hopkins Manager, EMC Technologies Thermo Electron Control Technology Division EMC & ESD Simulation Solutions One Lowell Research Center Lowell, MA 01852 Tel: +1 978 275 0800 ext. 334 Fax: +1 978 275 0850 [email protected] www.thermo.com/esd One Thermo, committed to integrity, intensity, innovation & involvement From: Peter L. Tarver [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 1:09 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: IEC and EN standard relationships Mike - I'd like to understand who is making any such commands to ANSI, et al. While I understand there is a move (and has existed for some time) to migrate to the IEC format for standards, there is no entity that I am aware of issuing dicta to standards bodies in the US. ANSI -- ANSI sponsors the US TAGs to the IEC. "ANSI Procedures for the Development and Coordination of American National Standards", §1.2.9, states that standards developers, "if appropriate, base their standards on or consider the adoption of an ISO or IEC standard as an American National Standard." Reference is also made to ISO/IEC Guide 21 - "Adoption of ISO or IEC Standards as regional or national standards." Similar text is found in "ANSI Procedures for the National Adoption of ISO and IEC Standards as American National Standards," §1.0. Further information may be gleaned from ANSI's National Standards Strategy at http://www.ansi.org/standards_activities/nss/nss.aspx?menuid =3 or at http://public.ansi.org/ansionline/Documents/News%20and%20Pub lications/Brochures/national_strategy.pdf CSA -- SCC and CSA in Canada made formal statements that they intend to increasingly adopt IEC standards, where there are not conflicts with preexisting national standards and to work toward harmonization otherwise. CSA also is producing more standards in the IEC format. In fact, the ANSI committee membership that developed the Z136 series of standards that went into creation of the CDRH requirements, also sat (and probably continue to sit) on TC76. The differences are relatively narrow, but the marking logotype requirements for higher power lasers are taken another ANSI document. UL -- UL has also decided to adopt the IEC format for new and revised standards; I recall hearing so, but I'm not certain it's across the board (some standards committees' membership may resist this, for their own reasons, but if it doesn't change the content, it should be of little account). For both CSA and UL, Code and regulatory based national differences will continue to exist for the foreseeable future. CDRH -- The CDRH requirements long preexisted IEC 825, though the CDRH have, in Laser Notice 50, made it clear that IEC 60825-1 may be used for laser evaluation (with a somewhat more onerous certification marking requirement). It was expressed to me in 1997 by Jerome Dennis that the single largest barrier to thorough harmonization with IEC 60825-1 is related to Class IIIa and the behavior of the cornea at invisible wavelengths that the IEC refuses to take into account. It is important to keep in mind that the CDRH is a federal agency and its requirements must be published in the Federal Register to have the force of law. The Federal Register has been in its present format for decades and is unlikely to change any time soon. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE [email protected] > From: Mike Hopkins > Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 12:42 PM > > Info from outside the EU: > > In the US, ANSI and others > have been told that any new standards written > must be harmonized with the equivilent EN's or > IEC documents (which are supposed to be the same > but aren't always). > > > From: Richard Hughes > > Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 5:50 AM > > > > It has disappointed me that, seemingly, the great > > majority of information flow on this thread has > > been due to individuals in Europe explaining how > > CENELEC standards relate to IEC standards ... > > However, taking my example > > standard of IEC 60825-1 again, I know that the > > Australian national standard is based on this > > document but there is no CB Scheme to tell me > > that (or to tell me that the USA goes its own way > > with the CDRH). > > > > So what I'd really like is to se the continuation > > of this tread, but with greater information input > > from outside of Europe. This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: [email protected] Dave Heald: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] Jim Bacher: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: [email protected] Dave Heald: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] Jim Bacher: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
