Thanks Kevin. Excellent webinar and great discussions. Thank you again. Can you please share your slides? Also, I have not received the IEEE email yet for the recorded download, but do you have a link to that yet?
Regan On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 4:10 PM Kevin Robinson <[email protected]> wrote: > *Last week I had the honor of presenting to the IEEE PSES Virtual Chapter > where I discussed OSHA's Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) > Program. There were a number of questions that were asked that I was > unable to get to, so I wanted to share the questions and answers below.* > > > *A note - As I am posting this from my personal account and these answers > have not been reviewed by OSHA Legal Counsel or agency leadership, these > answers reflect my own personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect > the opinion of OSHA. For more official responses to these or any > questions, please contact me at [email protected] > <[email protected]> * > > > *QUESTION:* > > This is a very good topic as our European colleagues understand CE marking > but get confused with NRTL requirements. Does OSHA feel CE is not enough > and that the additional NRTL requirements are mandatory for the USA. Any > plans to harmonize with the EU on CE? > > > > *ANSWER:* > > OSHA Explored this in 2008 in the form of a Request for Information. You > can view the original request and comments from the public at: > https://beta.regulations.gov/docket/OSHA-2008-0032/document > > OSHA’s final decision on this matter can be found at: > https://beta.regulations.gov/document/OSHA-2008-0032-0099 > > > > *QUESTION:* > > How does OSHA ensure competency to the older (non-IEC) UL standards > overseas? For example, there was a lawsuit against [a NRTL] that they lost, > where the expertise for the standards were present in the US, but not by > those overseas that were actually doing the work. We have seen subpar work > coming from overseas often. Does OSHA consider the current system > sufficient in this regard to oversee these overseas efforts? How does OSHA > determine competency when it is not using the standards itself and doesn't > evaluate products? > > > > *ANSWER:* > > OSHA conducts regular assessments of NRTL locations around the world and > as we increase staffing, we are increasing the number of assessments we do > every year. In addition, we regularly review complaints that come into the > NRTL Program office as well as complaints and incidents that may be > received by the NRTL. If OSHA notes a deficiency during an assessment, the > NRTL is given an opportunity to correct the deficiency. In the rare > instance that a NRTL is unable to adequately address the deficiency OSHA > will take the necessary corrective action up to and including reduction in > the NRTL’s scope of recognition to remove the sites(s) that present a > problem or full revocation of NRTL recognition. Thankfully this is very > rare. > > > > *QUESTION:* > > What are the occupational safety provisions of the NEC? E.g., is it the > whole document or just certain sections. If the latter, which ones? > > > > *ANSWER:* > > OSHA Regulations largely refer to NFPA 70E which applies directly to the > workplace. That said, many of the test standards recognized under the NRTL > Program reference the NEC (NFPA 70) and as the NEC addresses electrical > equipment and installations in the workplace it would apply. Local AHJs > largely enforce the NEC. > > > > *QUESTION:* > > There appears to be a misunderstanding by many that NRTL approval only > applies to to AC powered equipment (110V). It applies to DC & low voltage > AC as well, correct? > > *ANSWER:* > > OSHA regulations, specifically Subpart S of the Occupational Safety and > Health Act https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910 > applies to “Utilization Equipment” > https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.302 > . Utilization Equipment is defined as “Equipment that utilizes electric > energy for electronic, electromechanical, chemical, heating, lighting, or > similar purposes.” > https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.399 > . This is a very broad definition which does not limit the equipment based > on voltage, current draw, or type of power source. > > > > *QUESTION:* > > For UL traditionally, the word Listed and unique mark relative to UL > Recognition for components has been used. Local ordinances will often > specify Listing (not certifications or approvals). Most NRTLs have the same > marks for components and end products, without specifying Listing; does > OSHA consider this acceptable? Also, native European certification bodies > use certificates as the basis of certification, and the mark is not > required to be on the product, but are still considered approved. It seems > the presence of the Mark on the product, which has been the US way over the > years has been changing with infusion of other NRTLs. Is the Mark on the > product required to prove the product complies, or is a certificate? Is the > word Listed not required for other NRTLs and UL is just being more thorough? > > > > *ANSWER:* > > The NRTL Program applies only to end product certifications. “Components” > (ex. open frame power supplies, transformers, wiring printed wiring boards > and others) typically do not fully address all of the safety requirements > in the applicable test standard and some hazards have not been fully > investigated as part of the certification. Certain conditions are placed > on component certifications that must be addressed in the end product. > Components not integrated into, or evaluated as part of an end product > certification are incomplete and are therefore not acceptable to OSHA. > > > > OSHA determines an installation or equipment is acceptable to the > Assistant Secretary of Labor, and approved within the meaning of Subpart S > of the Occupational Safety and Health Act: > > (1) If it is accepted, or certified, or listed, or labeled, or otherwise > determined to be safe by a nationally recognized testing laboratory > recognized pursuant to § 1910.7; or > > > > (2) With respect to an installation or equipment of a kind that no > nationally recognized testing laboratory accepts, certifies, lists, labels, > or determines to be safe, if it is inspected or tested by another Federal > agency, or by a State, municipal, or other local authority responsible for > enforcing occupational safety provisions of the National Electrical Code, > and found in compliance with the provisions of the National Electrical Code > as applied in this subpart; or > > > > (3) With respect to custom-made equipment or related installations that > are designed, fabricated for, and intended for use by a particular > customer, if it is determined to be safe for its intended use by its > manufacturer on the basis of test data which the employer keeps and makes > available for inspection to the Assistant Secretary and his authorized > representatives. > > > > The NRTL Program Directive (Annex B 4.1B) requires the certification mark > of a NRTL to be applied to the product unless the size of the product makes > applying the mark impossible > https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/directives/CPL_01-00-004.pdf > > > > *QUESTION:* > > Does OSHA recognize (or more importantly...approve) the widely used Field > evaluation process conducted by some NRTLs? If not, then why not? If the > Field evaluation is conducted whereby OSHA does not recognize this process, > is it assumed that the product is not compliant 'federally' but > 'accepted/compliant' locally? > > > > *ANSWER:* > > OSHA regulations do not address what are typically referred to as “Field > Evaluations” or “Field Inspections”. Field evaluations/inspections are > typically non-destructive investigations that address only a portion of the > requirements in a specific test standard. The work is typically done at > the location of the end installation and is often done on unique or one of > a kind pieces of equipment. > > > Kevin Robinson > - > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html > > Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at > http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in > well-used formats), large files, etc. > > Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ > Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to > unsubscribe) <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.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.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) 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]>
