NISTIR 6077 THE
U.S. CERTIFICATION SYSTEM
FROM A GOVERNMENTAL PERSPECTIVEMaureen
A. Breitenberg
Office of Standards Services
National Institute of Standards
and Technology
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
October 1997
Foreword
Acknowledgments
Abstract
Introduction
U.S. Regulatory Philosophy
False and Misleading Advertising Prohibitions
Industry
Self-Policing Efforts
Government Involvement
Federal
Involvement
Federal Involvement in Certification Program
Accreditation
Certification Marks
State/Local Government Involvement
Transparency in the Development of U.S. Regulations
Other U.S. Statutory and Legal Obligations in the Certification
Area
Conclusion
The
Office of Standards Services periodically publishes information related to certification
as a service to producers and users of such systems -- both in the government
and in the private sector. This report provides those not fully familiar with
this field with an introduction to some of its complexities from a governmental
perspective. We hope that this material will be informative and will serve to
stimulate wider understanding of the purpose and nature of the government's involvement
in certification programs. The interested reader may wish to take advantage
of other available publications and services provided by the Office of Standards
Services. Return to Contents
I
would like to thank Charles Hyer, The Marley Organization; Patrick Cooke, Walter
Leight, and Mary Saunders, NIST; and many others for their careful review of and
comments on this document. Maureen A. Breitenberg
Office of Standards
Services Return to Contents
This
report is designed to provide the reader with an introduction to the U.S. certification
system from a governmental perspective. It highlights some of the relationships
that exist between federal and state agencies and the private sector and discusses
some of the history and philosophy behind the U.S. system. Key Words: certificates
of conformity; certification; certification marks; conformity assessment; product
approval; standardization; standards; testing Return to
Contents
After
declaring independence from England and prior to the formation of the United States
of America, authority to regulate products and to conduct such product assessments
as were deemed necessary rested with the individual states. With the signing of
the U.S. Constitution, states gave to the federal government the authority to
"regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and
with the Indian tribes..." However, in the first ten amendments to the Constitution,
also known as the "Bill of Rights," the States spelled out that the
"..powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited
by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
As a result, authority in the United States to regulate products (and to assess
the conformity of products to mandatory requirements) is split between the federal
and state governments. Conformity assessment is defined in ISO/IEC(1) Guide
2: 1996 as: "any activity concerned with determining directly or indirectly
that relevant requirements are fulfilled." Conformity assessment procedures
provide a means of ensuring that the products, services, or systems produced or
operated have the required characteristics, and that these characteristics are
consistent from product to product, service to service, or system to system. Conformity
assessment includes: sampling and testing; inspection;certification(2)
(of both products and personnel); and quality and environmental system assessment
and registration.(3) Conformity assessment also includes accreditation
of the competence of those activities by a third party and recognition
(usually by a government agency) of an accreditation program's capability. It
should be recognized that product certification, the type of conformity assessment
discussed in this paper, is only one type of conformity assessment. At
the federal level, one of the first instances of major regulatory involvement
in product certification occurred approximately 60 years ago. At that time U.S.
drug manufacturers could produce and sell drugs without testing them on either
animals or humans and without any kind of governmental approval. Governmental
action could be taken only against drugs which were misbranded or adulterated.
In 1937, physicians in Tulsa, Oklahoma reported to the American Medical Association
(AMA) the deaths of six patients from a liquified version of the then wonder drug
sulfa. This drug ultimately killed 107 people, mostly children, before doctors
realized what was happening and the drug was recalled. This tragedy led to the
enactment of the 1938 Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, which requires that drugs be
tested and approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) before marketing.
From such early beginnings, the federal involvement in certification has grown
both in extent and complexity. Return to Contents
It might
be useful to know something about the United States' regulatory philosophy to
understand when federal or state government agencies are likely to become involved
in conformity assessment, especially product certification. The United States's
regulatory philosophy relies heavily on a manufacturer's declaration of conformity
(or self-certification) wherever possible. Manufacturers' declaration of conformity
is one of the oldest and simplest forms of certification. The vast majority of
U.S. marketplace transactions involve only the buyer and the seller -- without
intervention by any third party, whether government or the private sector. There
are a number of reasons why this approach is successful in the United States.
These include: (1) the sometimes severe penalties imposed by the U.S. legal and
judicial system on products proven to be defective or hazardous to the public
safety or environment; (2) the increasing access that the U.S. consumer has to
information about poor quality or hazardous and defective products through various
news and publications media; (3) the size of the U.S. marketplace and the ability
of the U.S. consumer to switch to a competing product if dissatisfied; and (4)
U.S. laws and regulations regarding truth in labeling and advertising. The
last three serve to increase consumer protection by enabling U.S. consumers to
make better informed decisions regarding the products they purchase and to switch
to brands if dissatisfied. Return to Contents
As
noted above, one reason why the U.S. system works is that there are a number of
federal and state laws and regulations(4) that prohibit the use of false or misleading
labeling or advertising of products or services sold in the United States. In
some cases, U.S. laws and regulations not only prohibit false or misleading labeling
or advertising, but also mandate that information regarding certain characteristics
of a product or service be disclosed to buyers. At the federal level, one of most
important laws in this area, which is enforced by the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC), is The Fair Packaging and Labeling Act. This Act requires consumer commodities
to be accurately labeled regarding the description of the product's identity and
net quantity. The Textile, Wool, and Fur Acts, also enforced by the FTC, protect
consumers against misleading or false advertising and invoicing of textile, wool,
and fur products. On the other hand, the Appliance Labeling Rule, a joint FTC/U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) regulation, is an example of a regulation that requires
the disclosure of information to buyers, namely specific information on the energy
costs or efficiencies of major home appliances. While the FTC is not authorized
to resolve individual consumer complaints (though most states have established
offices for this purpose), letters from consumers can trigger investigations of
an industry or of a specific company. If, during an investigation, the FTC staff
find reason to believe that a company has violated the law, and if the case is
not settled by a formal agreement with the company (a consent order), the Commission
can decide to sue the company. Depending on circumstances, the case may be tried
before an administrative law judge or in federal court. The FTC may seek a cease
and desist order, a preliminary or permanent injunction against the sale of the
product, consumer redress, or other appropriate relief. Return
to Contents
When a manufacturer's declaration of conformity
combined with federal and state prohibitions on the use of false or misleading
labeling or advertising, does not afford sufficient marketplace protection, the
government will frequently rely on self-policing efforts by the affected industry.
A number of private sector industry or trade associations conduct conformity assessment
programs, especially product certification programs, to: (1) enhance the
reputation of their industry; (2) provide manufacturers with some assurance
regarding product quality, safety, environmental impact, or compliance with mandatory
requirements; (3) level the playing field, that is, establish a minimum
level of quality or safety for products produced by their industry and provide
consumers with a means to identify products which meet those minimum requirements;
and (4) avoid the need for government regulation. Return
to Contents
Although the U.S. Government relies to a large extent on
manufacturers' declarations of conformity to both mandatory and voluntary product
requirements, as well as on industry's self- policing efforts, if a product fails
to meet mandatory requirements, the federal agency with jurisdiction over that
product has the authority to take enforcement action against the producer, supplier
or distributor of the product. Governmental reliance on a manufacturer's or supplier's
declaration of conformity does not preclude the federal government from taking
whatever action it deems necessary against a manufacturer or supplier if the government
determines that a product is not in compliance with regulatory requirements. In
addition, when manufacturer's self-declarations or industry self-policing efforts
are not effective or adequate, government agencies may become more directly involved
in the assessment of compliance with mandatory product requirements. If the problem
with a specific product or service is a local one, states and local government
agencies are likely to be the responsible authorities. If a serious problem exists,
which is national in scope and which cannot be adequately or economically addressed
at the state and local levels, then the federal government is likely to get involved.
Return to Contents
Federal government involvement generally occurs when Congress
passes a law giving a specific federal agency the statutory authority required
to address such a problem at the national level. Federal agencies then develop
regulations to implement that law. As required by the Administrative Procedures
Act, such regulations go through an extensive public review and comment process
before they become final -- a process discussed in more detail later. In
addition to regulatory programs, federal agencies also conduct a number of other
types of certification programs. In general, federal government certification
programs can be classified into several general categories: - Programs to
certify products which directly affect the health or safety of the user or the
general public. - Programs to test products to avoid the necessity for retesting
at local levels or prior to each procurement. - Programs to provide a uniform
basis for trade by assessing the quality and condition of products offered for
sale. Examples of the first type of certification program include the evaluation
and approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, of new animal and human drugs, medical devices, biologicals,
and other products; the certification by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
U.S. Department of Transportation, of airplanes and major airplane components;
respirators and other breathing apparatus by the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health; and the certification by the Mine Safety and Health Administration
(MSHA), Department of Labor, of electrical and other potentially hazardous equipment
used in mines. An example of the second type of program is the Department
of Defense's (DOD) Qualified Products Listing (QPL) Program for parts, materials
and components used in military systems. This program reduces retesting prior
to each government purchase by testing products and placing those approved on
appropriate QPL's. An extension of this concept also underlies the DOD Qualified
Manufacturing Lists (QML's) Program, in which a manufacturer's process controls
and manufacturing capabilities are evaluated and approved for an entire range
of products. An example of the third type of program is the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's (USDA) program to grade and certify meat and meat products (on
a voluntary basis) using uniform grading standards for the buying and selling
of such products. The USDA also certifies dairy products, fresh and processed
fruits, vegetables, nuts and related products. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce, likewise inspects and grades
processed fish and shellfish at a seafood processor's request. The complexity
of such programs and the procedures used by each can vary extensively depending
on purpose, the nature of the product or service, as well as the extent to which
private sector programs are available and effective and can be used to supplement
federal efforts. More complex and comprehensive programs tend to be more effective,
but they also tend to be more costly. The federal government is obligated (by
law in the regulatory area) to consider both effectiveness and cost and to weigh
the two when establishing a new program. Return to Contents
The U.S. accreditation system for certification
programs is less complex than other U.S. conformity assessment areas, primarily
because the United States only has a few major programs. The most prominent government
program of this type is operated by Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) within the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). OSHA's program covers
electrical equipment/materials used in the work place. By law, all electrical
products used in the work place must be tested and listed or labelled by a certifier
(known as a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory, or NRTL) which is recognized/approved
by OSHA. NRTLs are private sector certifiers, and participation in the OSHA program
is voluntary. However, if certifiers wish to test such products, they must be
recognized/approved by OSHA.(5) NRTLs are subject to review at least once every
5 years. Applicants for OSHA recognition as an NRTL must have adequate administrative
and technical capability to be able to certify products in the areas for which
they seek approval/recognition. They must also be able to inspect factory production
runs as part of a product's evaluation and to conduct field inspections to ensure
proper use of the certifier's identifying mark or label on the product. The program
is open to all U.S. certifiers and to foreign certifiers if the countries of those
foreign certifiers are open to U.S. certifiers. The National Institute
of Standards and Technology can also accredit certifiers under its National Voluntary
Conformity Assessment Evaluation (NVCASE) Program. The program is intended to
enable the Department of Commerce, acting through NIST, to evaluate and recognize
competently conducted U.S. conformity assessment activities, including certification,
which are capable of meeting regulatory requirements of another country with which
the United States has an applicable mutual recognition agreement. The program
supplements the programs of other federal agencies and is generally initiated
upon NIST's receipt of a request for assistance from the appropriate U.S. regulatory
agency. The results of NIST evaluations provide a basis for the U.S. Government
to assure foreign governments that qualified U.S. conformity assessment bodies
are competent and can satisfy foreign regulatory requirements. NIST will conduct
evaluations using publicly developed requirements based to the maximum extent
possible on international guides and standards for the acceptance of conformity
assessment activities. The program operates on a fee-for-service basis. NIST provides
a certificate of recognition to a body meeting the requirements and maintain lists
of all qualified conformity assessment bodies. Return
to Contents
The federal government is also concerned with the registration
of marks used in certification programs due to the increasing international use
and importance of these marks in the marketplace. One of the most interesting
things NIST learned during the latest revision of NIST SP 774, the Directory of
Private Sector Product Certification Programs, was that while many, but not all,
of the marks used in certification programs are registered with the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office (PTO), many of these registered marks are not "certification
marks" as defined by U.S. law. To explain this situation, it may be
helpful to quote selectively from the definitions for the various types of registered
marks and related definitions contained in Section 1127, "Construction and
Definitions," of the Trademark Act of 1946 ("Lanham Act") as amended.
"The term 'person' and any other word used to designate the
applicant or other entitled to a benefit or privilege or rendered liable under
the provisions of this Act ... includes a juristic person as well as a natural
person. The term 'juristic person' includes a firm, corporation, union, association,
or other organization capable of suing and being sued in a court of law."
"The term 'person' ... includes any State, instrumentality
of a State and any officer or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State
acting in his or her official capacity. Any State, and any such instrumentality,
officer or employee, shall be subject to the provisions of this Act in the same
manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity." "The
terms 'applicant' and 'registrant' embrace the legal representatives,
predecessors, successors and assigns of such applicant or registrant." "The
term 'related company' means any person whose use of a mark is controlled
by the owner of the mark with respect to the nature and quality of the goods and
services on or in connection with which the mark is used." "The
terms 'trade name' and 'commercial name' mean any name used by a
person to identify his or her business or vocation." "The term
'trademark' includes any word, name, symbol, or device or any combination
thereof -- (1) used by a person; or (2) which a person has a bona
fide intention to use in commerce and applies to register on the principal register
established by this Act, to identify and distinguish his or her goods, including
a unique product, from those manufactured or sold by others and to indicate the
source of goods, even if that source is unknown." "The term 'service
mark' means any word, name, symbol, or device or any combination thereof -- (1)
used by a person, or (2) which a person has a bona fide intention to use
in commerce and applies to register on the principal register established by this
Act, to identify and distinguish the services of one person, including a unique
service, from the services of others and to indicate the source of the services,
even if that source is unknown. Titles, character names, and other distinctive
features of radio or television programs may be registered as service marks notwithstanding
that they, or the programs, may advertise the goods of the sponsor." "The
term 'certification mark' means any word, name, symbol, or device or any
combination thereof -- (1) used by a person other than its owner, or (2)
which its owner has a bona fide intention to permit a person other than the owner
to use in commerce and files an application to register on the principal register
established by this Act, to certify regional or other origin, material, mode of
manufacture, quality, accuracy, or other characteristics of such person's goods
or services or that the work or labor on the goods or services was performed by
members of a union or other organization." "The term 'collective
mark' means a trademark or service mark -- (1) used by members of a
cooperative, an association or other collective group or organization, or (2)
which such cooperative, association, or other collective group or organization
has a bona fide intention to use in commerce and applies to register on the principal
register established by this Act, and includes marks indicating membership in
a union, an association or other organization." "The term 'used
in commerce' means the bona fide use of a mark in the ordinary course of trade,
and not made merely to reserve a right in a mark." "The term
'mark' includes any trademark, service mark, collective mark, or certification
mark." U.S. certification programs use ALL of these types of
registration marks defined in the Trademark Act. In fact, only a few programs
use federally-registered certification marks as defined by the Trademark Act.
In addition, unregistered marks (often initializations/acronyms and/or symbols/logos
used on letterheads and reports to identify the organizations that provide product
certification) are also used in U.S. certification programs. The type of mark
used by a particular program is based on the type of organization which runs the
program (e.g., an independent laboratory or a trade association); existing ownership
of a well recognized trademark, service mark, or collective mark; familiarity
on the part of the certifier with the different categories of marks; and the cost
and perceived need for a registered mark. In drafting certification-related
regulations, several government agencies have already learned that the terminology
used in connection with marking requirements can have a major impact on the number
and types of organizations eligible to participate in the conformity assessment
program. For example, requiring certification programs to have a certification
mark (as distinct from some other type of mark) can eliminate many U.S. certification
programs from participation. Some agencies also own certification marks
which are registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and which are used
in their product approval/certification programs. Examples include the Department
of Transportation mark in its program for tanks used in the transport of hazardous
materials. The U.S. Department of Agriculture owns and uses several marks in connection
with its poultry and meat grading programs, and the Environmental Protection Agency
uses its Energy Star mark in programs designed to promote the manufacture and
use of more energy efficient products. Return to Contents
As
noted above, federal agencies are not the only U.S. governmental agencies with
authority regarding certification. States administer many different types of certification
programs covering a diversity of products. In some cases, states inspect or test
products under authority delegated by the federal government. For example, many
states inspect meat and meat products, certifying those that meet standards established
by the USDA. These states then authorize the use of the appropriate USDA marks.
Many states also inspect and issue certificates of conformity for manufactured
homes under authority delegated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD). Most state and local jurisdictions also have responsibility for water quality
testing under authority delegated to them by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). States may also impose additional state requirements and simultaneously
check for conformity to both state and federal requirements. States regulate
products under their own authority for health and safety reasons, including amusement
rides and thermal insulation, depending on each state's perception of the health
and safety impact of such products on its population. Products may be inspected
and/or tested directly by the states themselves, or indirectly through a requirement
that such products be inspected and/or tested and certified by an approved body,
such as a nationally recognized laboratory. An example of the latter is the regulation
of electrical building products by imposing a state requirement that they be tested/inspected
and bear the mark of a "nationally recognized testing laboratory." The
term "nationally recognized laboratory" is currently defined by each
state and/or municipality. States regulate products of direct or indirect
economic importance. Florida and California, for example, inspect products important
to their citrus fruit industry. Nebraska, with a considerable agricultural industry,
regulates tractors through a testing program at the University of Nebraska and
issues certificates of conformity for approved models. California, with its air
pollution problem, stringently regulates auto emissions equipment. States
inspect, test, and/or certify materials, products, systems and services they procure,
such as materials for the construction of state roads and bridges. In yet other
cases, the states establish standards, but leave enforcement (testing, inspection,
etc.) to local authorities. This is sometimes true for building and construction
materials. Again, the complexity of such state and local programs and the
procedures used can differ greatly just as they can at the federal level, depending
on the purpose of the program, the nature of the product or service, and the extent
to which private sector programs are available and effective. Return
to Contents
As mentioned earlier in this
paper, the federal government develops regulations, including those with conformity
assessment requirements, only after an extensive public review and comment process.
The Administrative Procedures Act (APA) establishes general procedures for rulemaking
which must be followed by U.S. federal government agencies (5 U.S.C. section 551
et seq.). At a minimum, the APA requires that for the issuance of a substantive
rule (as distinguished from a procedural rule or statement of policy), an agency
must: (1) Publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register.
This notice must set forth the text or the substance of the proposed rule, the
legal authority for the rulemaking proceeding, and applicable times and places
for public participation. (2) Provide all interested parties -- national
and non- national alike -- an adequate opportunity for submission of written comments
on the proposed rule. This public comment process serves a number of purposes,
including giving interested persons the opportunity to provide the agency with
information that will enhance the agency's knowledge of the subject matter of
the rulemaking. The public comment process also provides interested persons with
the opportunity to challenge the factual assumptions on which the agency is proceeding,
and to show in what respect such assumptions are in error. (3) Publish a
notice of final rulemaking at least thirty days before the effective date of the
rule, which includes a statement of the basis and purpose of the rule and which
responds to all substantive comments received. The APA makes an exception from
the requirement for publication of the final rule thirty days before its effective
date if the rule makes an exemption or relieves a restriction, or if the agency
makes and publishes a finding that an earlier effective date is required "for
good cause." Rulemaking proceedings are usually started by an agency
at its own initiative. However, the APA provides that each agency of the U.S.
Government shall afford interested persons the right to petition for the issuance,
amendment, or repeal of a rule. According to law, agencies must respond to the
request. If the request has merit, work will commence on developing a proposed
rule. In some cases, Congress (by statute) directs an agency to begin a rulemaking
proceeding. The APA also contains provisions for advance notice of proposed
rulemaking. This allow agencies to seek general comments on issues prior to developing
the specific regulatory proposal. Return to Contents
In addition to its openness and transparency
obligations under the APA Act, the U.S. Government has other domestic and international
obligations which affect the conformity assessment area. The U.S. Government is
a signatory to a number of international trade agreements which affect conformity
assessment, including certification. For example, the U.S. Government was a signatory
to the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (also known as the "Standards
Code") under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), one of the
first international agreements related to trade that recognized the importance
of standards and certification systems for "improving efficiency of production
and facilitating the conduct of international trade." The U.S. Trade Agreements
Act of 1979 implemented the Standards Code in the United States. Title IV of the
Act specifies obligations for the federal government, including responsibilities
bearing on certification. Each federal agency must ensure that foreign products
are treated in the same manner as domestic goods. Moreover, the federal government
is to take reasonable measures to promote similar practices by state governments
and the private sector. December 15, 1993 saw a successful conclusion of
the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations. In April 1994, the United States signed
the Uruguay Round Agreements. These Agreements included a revision of the Agreement
on Technical Barriers to Trade (the TBT Agreement). The Uruguay Round also created
a new institution as a successor to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT), the World Trade Organization (WTO). The new TBT Agreement sought
to ensure that technical regulations and standards, as well as testing and certification
procedures, do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade. However, it recognized
that countries have the right to establish protection at levels they consider
appropriate (for example for human, animal or plant life or health or the environment),
and should not be prevented from taking measures necessary to ensure that those
levels of protection are met. The new agreement encourages countries to
use international standards whenever appropriate, but does not require them to
change their prescribed levels of protection as a result of standardization. The
revised agreement also covers processing and production methods related to the
characteristics of the product itself. The coverage of conformity assessment procedures
was enlarged and the disciplines made more precise. Provisions applying to subnational
government and non-government bodies were elaborated in more detail than in the
prior TBT agreement. In addition to its obligations under the new TBT Agreement,
the U.S. Government has related conformity assessment obligations under the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The U.S. Government actively participates
in a number of regional efforts, designed to harmonize conformity assessment procedures
and requirements and to promote the mutual recognition and acceptance of conformity
assessment results. The U.S. Government also has domestic requirements placed
on it with respect to the conduct of conformity assessment activities. Recently,
Section 12, "Standards Conformity," of the National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act of 1995 was passed with "the goal of eliminating unnecessary
duplication and complexity in the development and promulgation of conformity assessment
requirements and measures." NIST was given responsibility for coordinating
"Federal, State, and local technical standards activities and conformity
assessment activities, with private sector technical standards activities and
conformity assessment activities." The objective of Section 12 is to encourage
federal agencies to make greater use of and place increased reliance on private
sector standards and conformity assessment activities and programs. Return
to Contents
The
United States has an extensive and sometimes complex system for ensuring the conformity
of products sold in the U.S. marketplace to both mandatory and voluntary standards
and requirements. Like the U.S. standards system, the U.S. certification system
has evolved in a decentralized manner. It is based largely on declarations of
conformity by manufacturers and suppliers of products sold in the U.S. marketplace,
as well as on industry self-regulation. Many U.S. private sector organizations,
as well as federal, state and local government agencies are involved in certification
for a variety of reasons. The assurance of product conformity can involve one
or more levels of government and increasingly involves reliance on private sector
programs and activities. As both federal and state budgets shrink, greater emphasis
is likely to be placed by government agencies at all levels on the use of and
cooperation with certification programs available within the private sector. Despite
its complexity, however, the U.S. certification system remains one of the most
effective, open, and transparent systems in the world. (1) ISO is the acronym
for the International Organization for Standardization, while IEC stands for the
International Electrotechnical Commission. The International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) is a worldwide federation of over 90 national standards
bodies. ISO covers standardization in all fields, except the electrical and electronics
fields which are covered by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).
IEC has members from over 40 countries which represent some 80% of the world's
population. Together ISO and IEC form the world's largest nongovernmental system
for voluntary industrial and technical collaboration in the field of standardization. (2)
Some organizations use other terms to refer to the process, such as product
listing, product evaluation, product regulation, product approval,
or the publication of research reports, but in this discussion, we will
use the term "certification." The reader should be aware of the existence
and use of other terms, however, to describe this activity. (3) In Europe,
quality and environmental system registration is often referred to as certification. (4)
These laws are enforced by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) at the national
level and by most states through the Offices of the State's Attorney General.
(5) OSHA is responsible for the regulation of all electrical products used
in the work place. For a list of the products under OSHA's jurisdiction which
require certification by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL), see
29 CFR 1910. Return to Contents
|