Reference
CSA and ULC Markings
What Do These Designations Mean?
By Mark C. Hughes, P.Eng.
© 2005 Sintra Engineering Inc.
As an ongoing part of investigating losses in which a product has failed and resulted in some sort of catastrophic loss, sometimes investigators or adjusters think they should send the failed product to either the Canadian Standards Association International (CSA) or Underwriters' Laboratories of Canada (ULC). The intent is to have these agencies look at the damaged products and provide an opinion on the nature of the loss. Unfortunately, this often ends up being the last time that particular failed component is seen, and any opportunity to recover costs has evaporated with the missing object. Understanding what these organizations do may help people understand why it is almost never appropriate to send CSA or ULC a damaged product.
The designations are important because they indicate that either the assembly or a component within the assembly has been tested to an appropriate standard. These standards are primarily intended to permit the safe operation of the assembly. In addition, CSA and ULC publish standards for a number of these tests. This makes ULC and CSA a very useful resource for finding out what requirements a product must conform to. There are limits, however, to how useful these agencies are.
In North America, most jurisdictions require that certain types of consumer, commercial and industrial products be tested by the nationally recognized testing laboratory, to ensure conformity with any applicable standard. CSA and ULC both do this testing, there are other less familiar organizations and these agencies are generally in competition with each other. It is rare to see both a ULC and a CSA marking on a product. The testing costs money and generally manufacturers want to spend as little money as reasonable in the manufacturing of their products. Examples of products that are tested include: gas and electrical appliances, heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems and components, lighting products, home entertainment products, industrial controls and switchgear, electro-medical and laboratory equipment, plumbing products, recreational vehicles, process controls, power supplies, sport and personal safety devices and information technology equipment.
To get the designation, the manufacturer submits appropriate technical documentation and a prototype of the product to either CSA or ULC. The product is then tested to determine whether it meets specific standards that apply to that type of product in the market in which it is intended to be sold. For example, electrical appliances are tested to a different set of standards than gas appliances. Although the requirements vary for different types of products, the goal is basically the sameóto help ensure that the product complies with the local codes and regulations. Production facilities are inspected regularly to ensure that they continue to comply with the standards.
That, in a nutshell, is the problem with sending damaged components to either CSA or ULC. Both organizations work for manufacturers and are obligated to them. I met a few representatives from CSA and they had commented that they were not allowed to convey the results of their testing to consumers but only to the manufacturers if they ever found a problem. As a consequence, you will never get information that would be helpful in pursuing a claim against a manufacturer. Often insurers will send them damaged components, but many times those components are never returned or commented upon by CSA. The people at CSA appreciate the components, because it assists them in the assessments and improvements of products being manufactured, but being nice to them will probably not be particularly helpful to figuring out the cause of a failure.
Mark Hughes, P. Eng. is a principal with Sintra Engineering, a Forensic Engineering firm.
return to Reference articles...
