Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: 10/lw factor....why can't we get along?

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Not to mention the fact that jurisdictions that adopt the NFPA would
likely still accept items that have been tested and "approved" under the
ICBO process, unless the NFPA 5000 has a DRASTICALLY different
approval/testing process.  Consider similar to an "or equal" clause the
many engineers use in specs.  If a non-NFPA testing/approval process is
substantially equal to an NFPA testings/approval process, then likely it
would be accepted by the local jurisdiction.  Now, it is certainly
possible that NFPA may create their own testing/approval process similar
to what ICBO does and would likely want users of their model building code
to use that process since it would be a revenue stream.  But, ultimately
it will be the local jurisdictions that decide what is or is not accepted
in terms of testing/approval methods.

HTH,

Scott
Ypsilanti, MI


On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Tom Skaggs wrote:

> > In addition if the NFPA provisions are implemented what will
> > replace the
> > ICBO approvals that we regularly use.  I doubt that many
> > manufacturers will
> > pay to get their products reviewed just for use in California.
> >
> > Mark Gilligan
>
> Don't be so naive.  Given the HUGE construction market in California, I can
> almost guarantee you that there will be plenty of manufactures who will get
> their products reviewed "just for California".  I think there is a
> legitimate debate on the pros and cons of California adopting the NFPA 5000
> vs the IBC, but product evaluation reports (or lack thereof) isn't one of
> them.
>
> Tom
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Thomas D. Skaggs, Ph.D., P.E.
> Senior Engineer
> APA - The Engineered Wood Association
> P.O. Box 11700
> Tacoma, WA 98411-0700
> ph: 253/565-6600
> fx: 253/620-7235
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> *   site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********