To: "INTERNET:seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: RE: ACI 355.2 - issue - THE BIGGER QUESTION ON CODE CREATION
From: Peter Higgins <76573.2107(--nospam--at)compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 11:33:43 -0500
Message text written by INTERNET:seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
>So how does something like this get so far out of hand before it makes it
the attention of the professional community. <
In this case it appears ACI didn't follow their own procedures for
balloting the standard to the membership. The way I understand it, ACI
355.2 was published and adopted under an emergency provision which
circumvents this process and allows the adoption of a standard as
provisional solely upon the approval of the ACI Board.
Emergency adoptions are probably a good thing. They allow the immediate
correction of a known serious defect in a standard. Witness the rescinding
of the ICBO steel frame proscriptive detail after Northridge. However, I
see no obvious need for the procedue to be used for ACI 355. We haven't
seen anchors fail in droves lately indicating a problem with them.
If ACI had followed their normal procedures for approval of their
standards, this would not have happened. For example as an ACI member I
would have seen it published for comment with ample time to do so and
present evidence if I chose to. The extended period would have allowed
collaboration with the users, industry and professions, which is exactly
the intent of the procedure.
The "emergency" adoption has greatly shortened this comment period, and
perhaps given the impression of it being moot in any case. It appears ACI
has already made up its mind, and comment is futile. What's mising is an
"emergency". When something like this happens, I tend to smell some sort of
rat. Perhaps that was what the lawsuit was all about. ACI has another
procedure for adopting standards with no public comment, and the lawsuit
was apparently an effort to ensure that at least an abreviated comment
period was provided.
Regardless, anyone who wants to comment had better get on their horse and
ride. May 1 approaches very quickly. I will have something to say, but now
feel like it will be talking to a brick (or perhaps RC) wall.
Peter Higgins, SE