The "REPORT ON DISCUSSIONS DURING UL MEETINGS WITH ELECTRICAL INSPECTORS AT THE 2010 IAEI SECTION MEETINGS" is now available online here:




http://www.ul.com/global/documents/offer...s/2010_iaei.pdf

Question and answer 1.4 is an unfair and incorrect way to talk about "UL's competitors". This blames enforcement difficulties on "lax Field Inspections" by the other NRTL's (I work for MET Laboratories).
As you may know, the other labs are forbidden to attend UL's meetings, I feel certain this is related to that. without some kind of substantiation, this is just propaganda, and I hope it would be refuted by inspectors that know and rely on all the NRTL's to help establish a defined level of safety with the Field Evaluation program. As many of you also know, we have to fail many of these projects, issue detailed reports of deficiencies, work with contractors to get corrections made and verified (It would be a much easier report if the products passed).
Enforcement problems referred to in this document could just as easily be blamed on bad customer service, the inability of customer to reach engineers on the phone, the slow response times in getting these jobs scheduled and completed.

I am not defended the statements made, but just be aware that the questions came from IAEI inspectors present at the meeting and not from the UL representatives. The answers provided are from the UL reps. I have attended one of these meetings a few years ago and positively did not get an impression UL was trying to “sell” the UL regulatory services aspect of the organization to the inspectors present and never made any negative statements about any other testing lavatory.

Please also note that the IAEI and it’s member inspectors have an extremely strong working relationship with ALL of the recognized NRTL's and gives NO preference to any one. The IAEI's relationship with UL is strictly on the Standards Development aspect of the UL organization and in the development of education and training programs for AHJ’s.

Thanks Bryan,

Correction - I don't have an issue with the question, I think the question is valid. In the answer, the UL rep states "Be sure to insist on UL field evaluations...". I think this consitutes an attempt to "sell" UL services over other labs, and the fact that it happens in s meeting we are not allowed to participate in (or even attend) is a problem. The IAEI International Office has refused to address this issue.

Thanks for your support of testing laboratory work - like the job of Inspectors, it is frequently misunderstood and disparaged.
I agree UL does a great deal to help the IAEI, and they are our industry leader. I just hope someone steps up within UL to make sure these kinds of comments are not made in the future.
Greg Smith
MET Laboratories
gsmith@metlabs.com

I'm going to see if I can get Inspectors to submit examples of "Lax inspections" - hopefully I can write it so that IAEI will post it on my Blog.

I can understand some of your frustration. People tend to say "U/L" when they mean NRTL and I think U/L likes it that way. They really want to be THE lab so I can see them trying to minimize the validity of everyone else.