本帖最后由 chenlf 于 2012-1-30 22:51 编辑
7 |% m6 E/ f) b/ ?* E
1 y( R6 k0 V4 O7 \- l3 u* N, L0 O拜读了Fasten的“电器类产品美国安全认证（NRTL）的法律依据概述”（参见： http://bbs.angui.org/thread-90219-1-1.html），想起了2000年左右，当时听TUV-R北美同事介绍NRTL时，提到了OSHA因为几场官司而变更NRTL体系的故事，由此几大机构可以在NRTL的体系下，开展原来基本上由UL垄断的电气产品安全认证（虽然严格地说，其有效性限于工作场所workplace）。但由于种种原因，一直无法看到其详细介绍。承蒙好友阿关发来了《ComplianceEngineering》上一篇介绍的复印件，终于比较清晰地了解了相关的历史渊源，可惜该期刊已经停刊，网上没有相应的电子版，阅读比较困难；春节期间爬了一下网，找到了比较清晰的PDF版，可惜仍然是扫描版。于是借助OCR软件，将其整理如本帖的文本，方便诸君分享。 2 E* M4 B; i' Y2 ]* S+ b
1 ^' L+ X& m2 D1 O, O
# P5 a, X- T: d* |# X0 W% O0 ?: O6 S) S# b6 p* w
% p( @. V% o" ~
: k! y R" F. j/ J% o& t免责申明: 1．推荐此文，只是为了让大家更好地了解现行NRTL体系的由来，无意推荐、谴责或褒贬任何机构。 2．所添加的注解只是为了方便英文不熟练的网友阅读方便，并非原文的构成，也无意成为文章的解读。 此外，原文文笔流畅，写作手法娴熟（苦了翻译软件;-））；故事娓娓道来，颇具可读性，但作者作为当事一方，个别用词可能存在强烈的感情色彩；原文中的个别比喻可能会令一些敏感的穆斯林感到不安，敬请留意。
0 ~8 L% G* d0 T1 q
7 d9 m: `* s9 I5 m. }4 d i
2 O8 f w; {) N) K% ~5 Q; ^) r' @) u
第一部分：背景介绍 & O6 {1 F6 B" g
讲述NRTL设立之初，OSHA的政府法规如何造成UL和FM的市场垄断地位（红色部分），以及其他政府部门对此的批评。原文标题中的Lenny应当是LenFrier先生的昵称，可能也暗指美国一个比较著名的卡通小狮子，Goliath是圣经中被打败的巨人，暗指LenFrier所面临的对手（你知道的）。（通常，比喻以小胜大，常见比喻是David& Goliath） 其他单词： Exodus:n. 逃离；(圣经)出埃及 Agency:n. 指政府机构
0 `) [4 ?: m8 M, O$ O; _=======================================================
3 Y( v3 q. C" N
" I" c P3 r/ v7 n8 ~& |Lenny and Goliath: A Modern Fable ; k |; O0 {. H7 I
作者：GlenDash
" |7 y2 |7 W; z: n- K/ f2 x0 l* M# {. Q( Z
The potential for competition has come to product safety,says MET’s Len Frier. It took only three lawsuits, two court orders, and 25years. * \ E8 t, {9 J2 w, m: M* a4 |
5 ?4 ]+ M0 `% E0 E. t/ O5 }0 @In the beginning there was Underwriters Laboratories,and not much else.
/ i/ g$ z0 Z8 y$ J: k4 O, C8 _8 H8 T6 SToday, an exodus from that era may have begun.More than 10 laboratories can now claim the mantle "Nationally Recognized TestingLaboratory," having been authorized by the federal government to certifyat least some electrical products for use in the nation's workplaces.Underwriters Laboratories remains the industry's giant, holding at least 80% ofthe market for "listings" (that is, certifications) of electricalappliances and utilization equipment, and well over 90% of the market forcomponents. Nonetheless, applicants for certification now enjoy advantages theyhave rarely seen before: they can get quotes from multiple certificationvendors, costs have come down, and lead times have dramatically improved. 9 h# Q% j5 {4 w9 @/ s' ~
All this is thanks in part to product safety'smost enduring iconoclast, MET of Baltimore, Md., and its champion, LeonardFrier. The now 60-year-old Frier had not even graduated from high school whenhe started as an electrician's helper at the age of 16. Self-educated, hebecame a registered Professional Engineer and founded MET in October 1959. The companyhad one employee: Leonard Frier. Frier went to work "field-testing"electrical power equipment, mostly at the behest of the state of Maryland. 8 C. t Y' B5 j3 R
# z1 k9 A# k! T
5 H4 k2 `1 C/ j. O3 B& Z
The 1970s: OSHA Requires Approval of Electrical Equipment + q8 `, [1 G& g& ?3 k8 l
In 1970 Frier decided to move into the businessof certification, where he would have to compete with Underwriters Laboratories. But it was tough going even to get started. 9 m- h5 @) W0 f1 ^; G1 e
That same year, Congress had created theOccupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to "assure so far aspossible even working man and woman in the nation safe and healthful workingconditions." Assuming jurisdiction over the nation's workplaces fromstates and localities, the new agency claimed a vast constituency, as a"workplace" was deemed to exist virtually wherever there was an employer/employeerelationship. Soon after its creation, OSHA published its regulation 1910.308(d), which providedthat electrical equipment would be held acceptable "if it is accepted orcertified, or listed, or labelled or otherwise determined to be safe, by aNationally Recognized Testing Laboratory, such as, but not limited to,Underwriters Laboratories Inc. and Factory Mutual [Research] Corporation."MET thus had the burden of proving that it was an entity "such as" UL,though as Frier and others pointed out, OSHA had provided no means by which itcould do so. 3 i6 q5 S; z" j9 ]1 J' [7 u9 M$ c
In 1973, OSHA published its regulation 1907,specifying a method by which organizations such as MET could become NationallyRecognized Testing Laboratories. But before MET could get OSHA to act on itsrequest, the agency reversed itself and called for 1907's revocation: it hadreceived more than 130 comments on the regulation, many of them critical. Anadvisory committee was to be formed to consider drafting new rules, but none wasever appointed. 9 U& q1 A; u& K7 n1 ]3 l
OSHA's failure to act didn't sit well withanother arm of the federal government. In 1976 the Federal Trade Commissioncomplained about the situation to Morton Corn, then OSHA’s man in charge. Cornresponded be saving that "clearly, OSHA has no interest in limitingcompetition." He closed his letter by stating that OSHA was committed tomaking a careful and thorough study of the problem. * \/ n* ~* ]0 ?* K0 a3 X' l
A year went by with no further action on OSHA'spart. The FTC complained again, this time to Eula Bingham, the agency's newchief. Referring to the fact that only Underwriters Laboratories and Factory Mutual were authorized to certify electrical equipment foruse in the nation's workplaces, the FTC insisted, "some action to open themarket to all competent testing laboratories ... should be takenimmediately." Bingham wrote back to assure the Commission that an"equitable solution can be reached in a matter of months." But stillnothing happened, nor would it for five more years.
7 o/ d% p6 Z q, V5 g | 
[复制链接]
/2 
|关于安规|小黑屋|安规QQ群|Archiver|手机版|安规网
( 粤ICP13023453-10 ) 
窥视卡
雷达卡
发表于 2012-1-30 22:14
收藏
分享
好帖
鸡蛋
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
