Ron,
You are indeed correct - it was a slip of my fingers. He did say ESA and NOT
CSA as I wrote...
--
Doug Nix, A.Sc.T.
IEEE PSES
Toronto Section, Ontario, Canada
d...@ieee.org
mobile (519) 729-5704
fax (519) 653-1318
Find me LinkedIn at http://www.linkedin.com/in/dougnix
On Feb 19,
Hi Doug,
Thanks for the quick follow up.
I’m not sure that Mr. Breton answered my question adequately, and I’m sure
Mr. Breton meant to say “then ESA expects the company to report the incident
to ESA (not CSA).” However, I guess we’ll all have to wait and see if this
type of regulation
Has any harmonised standard for the 1st IM regulation of Eup been published?
Thanks and regards,
Scott
-
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
emc-p...@ieee.org
All emc-pstc postings are
List,
In Canada, agencies are accredited by SCC (the Standards Council of
Canada, http://www.scc.ca). Certification and Inspection Body
accreditations are national in nature. Each Province and Territory has
their own AHJ that enforces the Provincial or Territorial electricity
act and
Okay, but…
my understanding was if I go to UL and send an application form to certify a
product as a “listed product” or a component as a “recognized
component” for the US and Canada I can use the UL-Label with “C” and
“US” which is also accepted by CSA.
If I understand the different mails
All,
I had an interesting conversation with Normand Breton, General
Manager, Product Safety at ESA this morning.
In response to Ron Pickard's question from earlier today, his response
was (I'm paraphrasing here) If a company sells the same product
outside of Ontario as they do in Ontario,
OSHA's NRTL program specifically does not address acceptance of
marks between accredited NRTLs, and mutual acceptance is not
determined by the US federal government.
NRTLs are not necessarily required to accept the other's test
report, nor are they required to accept another's FUS audit
report.
One comment regarding TRP/TIS not being part of the PTCRB.
It is part of the PTCRB certification. NAPRD 03 calls this testing out. CTIA
created these specifications on request of the carriers because of bad antenna
performance of the devices.
PTCRB is the PCS Test and Certification
Do you mean mutual acceptance of test data? UL and CSA are
testing/certification organizations authorized by governments in the US and
Canada to conduct tests and issue approval marks. Acceptance of marks is
determined by governments. ULc mark does not guarantee automatic accepted in
all
Hello Michael,
We have no agreement for marks. These links will help you understand the MOU
you refer to:
http://www.csa-international.org/news/releases/default.asp?articleID=8224
http://www.ul.com/components/articles.htm
http://www.ul.com/media/newsrel/nr042106.html
Best regards,
Jason L.
+++ Globalnorm-Conference „Product Compliance“, 09. and 10.06.2009 in
Berlin, www.globalnorm.de http://www.globalnorm.de +++
Hello,
some of my German machinery safety customers have asked me if CSA and UL have
cancelled the agreement of mutual acceptance of CSA_CUS and UL_CUS marks?
List Members,
One of our clients is requesting that we obtain TL 9000 certification. Has
anyone gone through this with a small size company? ( Less than 150 employees)
I'm interested in :
* Estimated cost for the certification
* Registrar you selected
* Estimated time to complete the
In message
28aa7ba6b8bc04409c3272690562b639016b6...@ausx3mps308.aus.amer.dell.com,
dated Thu, 19 Feb 2009, kazimier_gawrzy...@dell.com writes:
From the voting results on the second CDV, I?d surmise there is a
significant amount of controversy and expect the new standard will be
interesting
Ron
According to the IEC website, it is approved for FDIS circulation, which
happened on 23rd January. The target date is 31st March.
I am not close enough to elaborate on this, but I'd guess that a published
standard is some way off yet.
Neil Barker
Manager
Central Quality
e2v
106
From the voting results on the second CDV, I’d surmise there is a
significant amount of controversy and expect the new standard will be
interesting in it’s interpretations and implementation ….especially if
there are early adopters.
Regards,
kaz
From: emc-p...@ieee.org
To all,
What is the current status of IEC 62368? Is there an FDIS yet? How is the
voting going? What issues are the voters having with it, other than the
candle flame test? Is it still set to be published in early 2009 or is a delay
likely?
A general status update is requested and
Ian
EN 60068 series standards give you a huge range of environmental tests.
En 60721 series is a great help in defining your environment.
Ideally, start with the latter to define your environment, and then use the
former to define your test regime. There are many cross references between the
Mil Std 810
H HBK 454
Telecordia
The Grinch Who Stole Christmas, Dr Sues
NEMA/IEC60529
NFPA(NEC)/IEC60364
Only the last two could be considered normative.
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org]On Behalf Of
Gordon,Ian
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 6:55 AM
To: IEEE EMC SAFETY
All
I'm not sure if this is within the scope of this group or not - but I'm
sure I will get valuable advice either way.
Can anyone suggest any good reference documents etc on environmental
testing of electrical equipment. The testing I am concerned with is
primarily as part of the requirements of
Ron,
I will pass the message back and see what happens. If I get any kind of useful
response, I'll post it with the author's permission.
--
Doug Nix, A.Sc.T.
IEEE PSES
Toronto Section, Ontario, Canada
d...@ieee.org
mobile (519) 729-5704
fax (519) 653-1318
Find me LinkedIn at
Hi Doug,
Thanks for the follow up and maybe we can obtain closure on this very soon.
However, in the forwarded message from Mr. Yosef, the focus and concern was on
incidents of products “sold or used in Ontario” (see “As of July 1,
2008,…” paragraph), implying only within Ontario’s
Listers,
I've had a conversation with Mr. Mina Yousef, a product safety
engineer with ESA regarding clarification of the requirements for
registration. With his permission, I am forwarding one of the emails
he sent me to the list.
Much of what we discussed on the list is in his message,
Hello group
Is anyone familiar with Japanese PSE mark scheme?
In the DENAN law product list for nonspecified products under the
category Electrical Motor-Operated Appliances in Item 50 for Office
printing machines is a restriction for printing materials of not more
than 515 mm in length and of
Did 60068 replace 60529?
On Feb 19, 2009, at 10:05 AM, Barker, Neil neil.bar...@e2v.com wrote:
Ian
EN 60068 series standards give you a huge range of environmental tests.
En 60721 series is a great help in defining your environment.
No, 60529 is concerned only with degrees of protection provided by enclosures;
i.e. Ingress Protection.
60068 is environmental test standards, and includes all sorts of environmental
tests such as temperature (steady-state, shock, dry, damp, etc), humidity,
vibration, shock, and so on.
Both
Comments on how 60068-2-x compares to U.S. MilStd 810 ?
60721 - have not seen this std, appears interesting. The scope
statement
The standard classifies groups of environmental parameters and
their severities to which a product may be exposed under its use
conditions, including periods of
My understanding is that 60068-2-x defines test methods.
Test levels are defined in other standards, depending on type of equipment and
environment.
Regards,
David
David Gelfand
Conformity Specialist
Kontron Canada Inc.
616 Curé Boivin
Boisbriand QC
Canada J7G 2A7
From:
Take all of the parts of 60068-2-x and put them together and you will
have something very similar to MIL-STD-810. 60068 does not define test
levels for specific applications, only the test methods.
60721 has been around a long while, but does not seem to be in
particularly common usage. It
I believe that the 60068-2-x series suggests the test levels (although
this is based on your application for the device) but specifically
defines the test methods
Mark Schmidt
From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Barker,
Neil
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 12:11 PM
Maybe I am getting too far into the details, but let me add a few items.
In the United States, local, state and federal agencies must accept NRTL
approvals as long as the specific approval is within the OSHA scope of the
NRTL. Whereas UL is approved to test to a large number of standards,
As long as UL tests a product within its accredited scope, then it should be
accepted in Canada. UL has a fairly extensive scope.
http://www.scc.ca/certifiers/cb_uli_e.pdf
Historically, the United States’ economic dominance in North America and
UL’s dominance of the U.S. certification market
31 matches
Mail list logo
