Seems like the NRTL (or, since this is for Canada and outside of OSHA's scope, they will be operating as a Certification Body?) is simply applying the standard? So the question might become, why does CAN/CSA-C22.2 No. 61010-1 2nd Edn Amd 2 require this? I don't have that document, so I am guessing the SDO thought the amendment was significant enough that they thought it would important to be able to tell if a product had been certified to the old or new version. (I am also wondering if that revision has an effectivity date, i.e. is it yet mandatory for new certifications? That's another story.) I am really commenting because I see a tenuous link to the "no-grandfathering" thread about EU directives. For CE, the date of manufacture is clearly marked, and so it is relatively clear that if it has a CE mark and was made in, say 2007, what version of the directive (should have been) applied and hence which revision(s) of the applicable standards should have been used to give presumption of conformity. True, often there will be two versions (during a "3 year" transition). But the DoC should explicitly give this information. Whereas in USA if a product bears an NRTL mark, the date is allowed to be encoded in a way that only the NRTL and the manufacturer understand. And if you lookup the product on the NRTL's Certification database [depending which NRTL] you are likely to see only a description of a "listing category", which includes mention of a US standard, but you probably will still not know which revision was used. Typically existing certifications are grandfathered for quite some time. I suspect Canada is similar to the US in this regard? Just thinking... Regards, Glyn Garside
Subject: Re: [PSES] Canada Requirement From: Mark Schmidt <[email protected]> List-Post: [email protected] List-Post: [email protected] List-Post: [email protected] Date: Mon, September 28, 2009 7:41 am To: [email protected] Hello Ron, I would rather not disclose the NRTL. It is a Canadian National differences to UL 61010-1 dated October 8, 2008. See the text below. 5.1.5DV D2 Addition of the following for Canada only. This does not apply in the United States: Product markings shall provide indication of the requirements to which they comply. The following symbol shall be marked on the product to indicate compliance with the requirements of CAN/CSA-C22.2 No. 61010-1, 2nd edition, including Amendment 1. The documentation for the product shall describe the intent of this symbol as follows, or in equivalent wording:- "This product has been tested to the requirements of CAN/CSA-C22.2 No. 61010-1, second edition, including Amendment 1, or a later version of the same standard incorporating the same level of testing requirements". Note: The number within the "C" may be incremented if different test requirements are adopted in the future. Thanks, Mark From: Ronald R. Wellman [mailto:[email protected] <http://email.secureserver.net/#Compose> ] Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2009 8:46 AM To: Mark Schmidt; [email protected] Subject: RE: Canada Requirement Hello Mark, This is the first time I've heard this. Considering that, could you please let us know who the NRTL is making this request, and what supporting documentation they are using to support this labeling claim. Best regards, Ron Wellman From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected] <http://email.secureserver.net/#Compose> ] On Behalf Of Mark Schmidt Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 8:02 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Canada Requirement Hello all, It has been requested by a NRTL based on National differences for UL 61010-1 that a new requirement to CSA C22.2 61010-1 is that a symbol (consisting of a C with a 1 inside the C) label is to be placed on the device and a statement in the manual stating: "This product has been tested to the requirements of CAN/CSA-C22.2 No. 61010-1, second edition, including Amendment 1, or a later version of the same standard incorporating the same level of testing requirements". Has anyone else been required to do this doesn't seem very logical. Thanks, Mark Schmidt - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <[email protected]> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> David Heald: <[email protected]> - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <[email protected]> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> David Heald: <[email protected]> - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <[email protected]> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]> David Heald <[email protected]>
