Morning
"Someone" really should have reported at least the first 2 of those incidents to the relevant NTRL or to OSHA because that totally devalues the FUS concept and is effectively fraud and could lead to dangerous products on the US market L. OTOH, I doubt that anyone in the actual factories would have worried much - anything for an "quiet life"! Some of the others display a chronic lack of technical training and/or expertise on the parts of the auditors in question, and could also lead to cases where auditors don't spot safety-related discrepancies, and don't issue stop shipment/variation notices, where they should have - and they reflect very badly on the NTRLs which employ them. So what "qualifications" (etc.) are the NRTLs required to ensure that their auditors have? John Allen W.London, UK -----Original Message----- From: Brian O'Connell [mailto:oconne...@tamuracorp.com] Sent: 11 February 2016 23:05 To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: Re: [PSES] NRTL invoices Refusal to pay for any audit services rendered that the NRTL deems necessary will result in suspension of right to apply their mark to any products. Stuff seen during various NRTL FUS audits: - Asia sites - auditor arrives 0830, reads papers and drinks coffee until 1100, returns at 1300 with papers for QA to sign. - Latin America site - auditor arrives 1030, asks what is in production, logs times of 0800-1500 on audit form, then leaves about 1100. - U.S. customer site - auditor arrives 0930, inspects units that do not bear his agency's marks (and have never been assessed by any NRTL), writes variation notice, then leaves about 1100. - Canada customer site - auditor arrives 0730 goes directly to receiving inspection and goes through files and component records then abruptly walks out at 1600 with the audit report taped to the QA office door. - Asia site - auditor writes variation notice because hi-pot test level is too high. Their agency required 2500V, another wanted 3kV. - Asia site - auditor writes variation notice because product is being hi-potted twice during production process, and because one test level is a bit higher than the report. - Latin America site - auditor issues variation notice because cord sets were bulk-packed in a separate box. - Latin America site - auditor issues variation notice because no ground bond test is being done on a class II construction (auditor previously saw it being done on a class I product). And there was no requirement in the construction report. Brian -----Original Message----- From: Richard Nute [ <mailto:ri...@ieee.org> mailto:ri...@ieee.org] Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 2:27 PM To: Brian O'Connell; <mailto:EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG> EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG Subject: RE: [PSES] NRTL invoices When I was hosting the FUS, I had a rule that inspection would not interrupt or disrupt production. I insisted that the inspector identify the products to be inspected, the construction, and the components before we went to the factory floor. If the product was not in production that day, then it could not be inspected. I determined when it would be in production, and the inspector could return on that date. (Never happened.) I refused to pay for a non-inspection. I set a goal of zero variances from an inspection. I did my own inspection in advance of when the unannounced inspection would take place. (Inspections at that time were quarterly; I could anticipate a window in which the inspection would occur.) I found and corrected either the construction or the report. The certification house couldn't believe we could go so long -- two years -- without a variance, so they sent managers to oversee the inspections. Zero variances. Rich - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 < <mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org> emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: <http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html> 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/> http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. Website: <http://www.ieee-pses.org/> http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: <http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html> http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe) List rules: <http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html> http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas < <mailto:sdoug...@ieee.org> sdoug...@ieee.org> Mike Cantwell < <mailto:mcantw...@ieee.org> mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: < <mailto:j.bac...@ieee.org> j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: < <mailto:dhe...@gmail.com> dhe...@gmail.com> - ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 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 <sdoug...@ieee.org> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>
