Raymond

. E.Burg @us.u Tb: Jim.Raba@EE.DOE.GOV I.com cc: burg@us.ul.com, Edward.Pollock@EE.DOE.GOV, lenore.j.berman@us.ul.com, stricklett@nist.gov, 01/24/02 06:35 PM Keith.A.Mowry@us.ul.com, Jodine.E.Smyth@us.ul.com, James.Beyreis@us.ul.com Subject: Re: Client Interactive Programs Manual

Good Afternoon Jim, Please excuse our delay in responding, but we wanted to provide you with a complete and accurate answer. The information provided in the attached letter has been provided by our Global Accreditation Services and reviewed by Mr. Keith Mowry our Department Manager of our Global Accreditation Services. Keith Mowry has been involved with the work of ISO CASCO for more than 10 years. ISO CASCO is the committee responsible for -SO/IEC documents for conformity assessment bodies and activities. For the past two years, Mr. Mowry has served as the Chair of the American National Standards Institute International Conformity Assessment Committee (ANSI ?CAC) which is the U.S. representative to ISO CASCO. In that capacity, Mr. Mowry has provided national leadership in defining U.S. positions to ISO CASCO and has led the U.S. delegation to the 2000 and 2001 CASCO plenary meetings. We hope this information provides you with the response to your inquiries and you can proceed with the final formal recognition of L under DOE's Energy Efficiency program. If you have any further cuestions, please let us know. We also will be faxing and FED-Eking the formal copies of the letter to your attention.
(See attached file: Raba DOE 1-24-02.doc)
Ray Burg Manager

- CAS 3015E

- 1\73K- !Lk'-&R
Underwriters Laboratories --Inc. 333 Pfingsten Road Northbrook , IL, 60062 Tel: 847

- 272-8800 -x 42257 Fax: 847-509-6227 http: //w-uvw .ul.com

,im.Raba@EE.DO E.GOV To: burg@us.ul.com, lenore. j.berman@us.ul.cam
01/22/2002 09:26 AM Programs Manual cc: Edward. Pollock@EE.DOE.GOV, stricklett@nist.gov Subject: Client Interactive

Ray, Good morning and thanks again for permitting me to examine Chapter 2, "Client Test Data Program" in the UL Client Interactive Programs Manual. Question: To what national or international certification criteria doesChapter 2, and therefore the Manual adhere?

Chapter 2 appears to follow the general requirements and guidelines for a certification body set forth in ISO/IEC Guides 27-1983 and 28-1982, referred to in section 431.27(c)(3) of 10 CFR Part 431, but I found no reference to either ISO/IEC Guide 27 or 28 in Chapter 2. Does the UL "Client Test Data Program" or the "Energy Verification Service" adhere to ISO/IEC Guides 27 and 28? If so, where are they mentioned? Also, is there any UL requirement for a manufacturer's motor efficiency testing laboratory to meet the requirements set forth in ISO/IEC Guide 25-1990, referred to in section 431.27(c)(3) of 10 CFR Part 431? If so, where is such a requirement mentioned and what procedures does UL follow to ensure a manufacturer adheres to ISO/IEC Guide 25? Yours truly, Jim 202-586-8654

xxx* *ic y:** Internet E-mail Confidentiality Disclaimer

This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate , distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you received this e-mail message in error, please return by forwarding the message and its attachments to the sender. Underwriters Laboratories Inc. and its affiliates do not accept liability for any errors, omissions , corruption or virus in the contents of this message or any attachments that arise as a result of e-mail transmission. >h'T. i'y: ^cX is X *XXx sx X. X*Xic t ic ^F ^F T. r
. X. XT. X XY X. X, is is Y

. Xxy: :Fxx Y

. X :FX ^: ^: *%'^ ^c - k ^c it * X :F*x :e * :F ^' 

# 0

Raba DOE 1-24-02.doc

## January 24, 2002

Mr. James Raba Building Research and Standards Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585
Subject: E-Mail of July 22,2002 Dear Jim, Our response to your e-mail inquiry is as follows: The UL EVS -[Energy Verification Service] fulfills ISO/IEC Guide 65, General requirements for bodies operating product certification systems. Guide 65 does not have any specific requirements for the acceptance of test data from the manufacturer of the product being certified. However, this practice is common among product certification bodies and accepted, under proper procedures, in all parts of the world. Section 4.4 of Guide 65 provides requirements for "subcontracting" of testing. As there are no other app ica e requirements in Gui e an as 's con racf ?the manufacturer requires only accurate information (including test data) to be provided to UL, UL considers the "subcontracting" clauses of Guide 65 to be those most applicable to the acceptance of test data from the manufacturer.

through the contract manufacturers must sign for UL service. The CTDP does-notattempt to follow either Guides 27 or 28, nor does it reference these documents,. Guide 27- pertains to corrective actions for certification bodies to take in the event their mark is misused. Guide 27 has no content related to acceptance of test data from manufacturers. Guide 28 provides guidelines for a model third party product certification system. Guide 28 has only one very minor reference related to acceptance of test data from any external source. The material in Guide 65 is far more detailed and bias is manage . i is requirement t rough the specific activities in lent Guide 65 section 4.4 requires an a ro riate agreement to govern acceptance of test data from manufacturers. UL's contract with the manu acturer as note a ove fulfills this requiremen °l7C`is required to take res ons' „y, to and to retain responsibility for all certification decisions. UL fulfills this requirement by baking full responsibility or h'e ce i 'icarions it issues regardless of the source of test data. Finally, UL is required to assure itself that the source of the test data is competent and that any Test Data Program t e CTD apter 2 o t e Clien n erac we Program anual) and

# E



# • instructive in this area. References to the unrelated Guides 27 and 28 in the CTDP

would cause misunderstanding of which ISO/IEC requirements apply to the various portions of UL's programs. 10 CFR 431.27 (c) (3) requires UL have ". . . experience overseeing compliance with the guidelines contained in ISO/IEC Guide 25. . ." The regulation does not explicitly require that UL audit, assess or accredit manufacturer's laboratories for compliance with Guide 25. UL has significant experience understanding, adapting, documenting and ap Iying the requirements of Guide 25 to manufacturer's la_ stories as evidence y e CTDP documen a ion an overseeing compliance of manufacturers w h'U'C s_ Section 1.1 of Guide 25 indicates the requirements therein are those, which must be met for a laboratory -to-demonstrate its competence. Nothing in Guide 25 indicates the requirements therein are a basis for a transfer of responsibility for the test data. Indeed, Guide 25 anticipates laboratories that demonstrate their competence by meeting requirements therein will maintain responsibility for the test data, especially in a legal liability sense. The combination of the laboratory maintaining this responsibility, AND Guide 25 compliance, is viewed in many markets as an appropriate basis for acceptance of test data. Note however, that Guide 65 requires that UL take on the responsibility for the test data generated by a manufacturer. Based on the text of Guide 25, how Guide 25 is used in the market, and UL's understanding of responsibility (including legal liability) for test data, UL has determined that Guide 25 as written can not solely be the basis on which it accepts responsibility for the test data generated from manufacturer's laboratories. As a result 's CTDP requirements are an ada tation of Guide 25, with necessary changes made so that UL has an ade uate a^.ta ins responsibility or a es da a r a manufacturers labora ory.

with the original tes

t data generat d by he manu acturer. uc a requiremen i The most important change is UL's requirement that a minimum amount of the manufacturer's testing is repeate and t at the data from the repea es ing correlate unKeard of in the testing market and is in no way required by Guide 25. However, UL believes this additional requirement is necessary to accept responsibility for the test data. In other areas, UL has altered the Guide 25 requirements to play a direct role in the testing that it accepts. For example, UL itself conducts audits of manufacturers' laboratories under the CTDP. Guide 25 only requires e a ryo au it itself. Again, this practice is not found in the testing market as clients of laboratories do not visit the laboratory to audit it. However, UL believes this additional requirement is necessary to accept responsibility for the test data.

## Page 2

1/25/02

In general , UL does not rely solely on a manufacturer's self-monitoring of laboratory competence through the laboratory's quality system. Rather, UL itself directly monitors those aspects of laboratory operations that contribute to the accuracy o a. The. CTDP cover,9 a a ora M as e - e ine in ui v^Frtch°diT^ct l to the a c u r c of test data roduced. UL adds on a second level of assurance though •audit testing and subsequent data correlation. Through the development of the CTDP by adaptation of Guide 25, UL has demonstrated its un ers an Mi e impac accuracy o test data an its un_ ers i a top ia r to basis c t res onsi irity fd'r"test-data Through many years of operating the CTDP, UL has demonstrated experience vrs-eeing a laboratory not just to Guide 25 requirements, but to even more stringent requirements related to transfer of responsibility for test data. The accreditors of UL's product certification programs recognize the extent to which UL has understood these issues and fully accept the CTDP as fulfilling Guide 65 requirements. We hope the above adequately answers your questions, however if you need additional information or clarification, please let me know.
0 Sincerely yours, Reviewed by:

Raymond E. Burg Keith Mowry Manager - CAS - 3015 Department Manager Northbrook Office Global Accreditation Services Cc: UL Staff -L.Berman, J.Beyreis, R. Burg,R.King,J.Smyth



# E