FYI, here is an article from the NEC Digest regarding the "CE" mark:
By Mark W. Earley, P.E.
To date this column has not been used as a forum to speak out on controversial technical issues. As NFPA’s Chief Electrical Engineer, it is incumbent upon me to publicly remain neutral on controversial issues that are being debated and discussed in the codes and standards making process. The power of the NFPA system is consensus among the technical experts, rather than the single opinion of an individual, so it is not my role to try to unduly influence the outcome of the technical discussion.
However, I believe that it is time to venture into the debate on listing or labeling of equipment. This debate is not occurring within the circles of electrical safety professionals where the value of listing and labeling is well-understood; rather it is occurring at the user/enforcement level where enforcement professionals are being challenged by those who perceive listing and labeling of equipment as financially burdensome. Independent third-party evaluation of electrical equipment has long been an essential element in the US electrical safety system. Consumers of electrical equipment, whether it is part of the building electrical infrastructure or an appliance such as a toaster or microwave oven, have come to expect that the electrical equipment in their homes and workplaces has been subjected to a thorough safety assessment.
Most jurisdictions do not have laboratory facilities or staff personnel trained in the evaluation of equipment. If they did, either manufacturers would be saddled with the burden of paying all of those jurisdictions to evaluate their equipment, or the customers would have to pay. It is also possible that different jurisdictions would come to different conclusions about the suitability of a given piece of equipment.
The system of product evaluation and listing that exists in the U.S. has been an ideal solution. It centralizes the evaluation function in a few qualified testing laboratories. Over the years, checks and balances have been implemented to certify the laboratories. The best known is OSHA’s Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) program, which was created specifically to accredit laboratories that certify products for use in the workplace.
Some states operate their own accreditation programs. Such programs also evaluate the laboratories for certification of consumer products in addition to commercial and industrial products. There are also peer review programs in which laboratories certify each other. This is an interesting concept in that competitors are certifying competitors. A competitor is not likely to give a competitor a break; in fact, they may be merciless.
The market for electrical products has changed substantially in recent years. Globalization has resulted in an influx of products manufactured outside of North America , so some of the product certification organizations have global operations. They certify products for the US marketplace to ANSI standards in the countries where the products are made. This system has been very effective at facilitating global trade. However, there is a lot of equipment in the marketplace that was not built to ANSI standards for an NEC environment; it may have been built to European (CENELEC) or IEC standards, or it may be custom-built to a manufacturer's specifications.
Much of the equipment built to European standards carries the "CE mark," sometimes referred to as a “CE listing.” This certification is often promoted as being equivalent to the laboratory certifications by an NRTL. Is it equivalent? Is it a listing? (See Article 100 definition)
Certification by a qualified testing laboratory is an evaluation by an independent third-party. That means they are neither the manufacturer nor the purchaser. This evaluation is conducted in accordance with nationally recognized standards and involves the production of a technical report that summarizes the results of the evaluation. Since there are evaluation programs for the certification of laboratories, an AHJ can decide which laboratories he or she will accept. Therefore, there are checks and balances in the system.
The CE mark is aself-declaration by the manufacturer that their product complies with the European Directives. There is no requirement that a third party be involved in this process. Is a self declaration by a manufacturer really equivalent to a third party evaluation?
In a prior career, I worked for a testing laboratory. There were many good customers who made good products. However, many of those same good customers made mistakes in the design of their products. As part of the evaluation process, those mistakes were corrected and a compliant product was certified. Since my information is somewhat dated I recently asked people involved in product certification what they are seeing. Not much has changed. Keep in mind that these are companies who know their product is going to be third party evaluated; what about companies who know their product will not to be looked at by a testing laboratory?
We have a proven system of electrical safety in the United States and Canada . It takes good solid installation codes along with product certification to the appropriate standards and high quality inspection of the installations to ensure safety. Ignoring one of those critical elements is a safety disaster waiting to happen.