This is a subset of a bigger problem: the meaningless nature of the UR mark. Since UL allows itself to issue this mark with less than full evaluation or testing to the standard, or with less than full compliance, anybody using a UR part needs to take that approval with a bucket (not a grain) of salt. Then to further frustrate attempts by component users do things right, UL does not publish the Conditions of Acceptability, and you have to go to the part mfr to try to get them to show the list with you.
It's an appalling situation where an accredited certification body can do less than a complete job, the mfr gets to use their mark anyway, and the public is not given access to the information as to what areas are lacking from the approval. Having said all that, in some cases nothing is lacking, it's simply a properly and fully approved component. I have no problem with that. And yes, I realize we are free to walk away from any part mfr that won't give us the Conditions of Acceptability. Jim Eichner, P.Eng. Compliance Engineering Manager Xantrex Technology Inc. e-mail: jim.eich...@xantrex.com web: www.xantrex.com Confidentiality Notice: This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Kunde, Brian Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 6:26 AM To: ieee Subject: RE: When UL component recognition is not enough. The "Company" has the right to accept or not any component for any reason even though in this case the reason they give seems unreasonable. I expect there are other reasons they do not want to use this component and they are just using this as the excuse. If the Company is trying to get NRTL approval on their product and their non-UL NRTL has a problem with this component, then their NRTL needs to contact UL and get things straitened out. I have seen competing NRTLs nit-pick over such things in the past and I think it shows a lack of professionalism. If they do not get resolve, I would contact OSHA and complain. The Components Manufacturer will have to decide if they are willing to lose such business over something so small. I think it would be a very simple paperwork process to re-list and document their components under the new standard with UL. In most cases, UL would not require additional evaluation or testing. The two standards are very similar. The Other Brian From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Robert Johnson Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 4:20 PM To: ieee Subject: When UL component recognition is not enough. I have a complaint about a certification process where agencies are providing approvals of little value. There are products for sale which have been reviewed (for example) to UL 1950, and are currently being manufactured and UL recognized. UL 1950 is a withdrawn standard, replaced by UL 60950. I have no problem with that since UL has conducted an IEC Sector Review Process which assures the product has no safety shortcomings with regard to the current standards. For standard changes affecting safety, a requirement effective date - RED is established and applied to the product. However a company wishing to use this product has a problem with the component recognition since it is to a withdrawn standard as is stated in the Certification Directory. The company using the component must either have the component manufacturer resubmit, or have the component reassessed as part of the end product evaluation. The result is, the component recognition is of no value to the new customer even though UL has gone through the work of assuring the component has no shortcomings with regard to the current standard. Apparently UL is reserving the step of updating the paperwork as an income source. - 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.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 <emcp...@ptcnh.net> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com> LECO Corporation Notice: This communication may contain confidential information intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you received this by mistake, please destroy it and notify us of the error. Thank you. - 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.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 <emcp...@ptcnh.net> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <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.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 <emcp...@ptcnh.net> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com>
