Product
Approval
Program Oversight Committee (POC)
MINUTES
March
17th 2008
1.00 pm – 3.20pm
Product Approval POC Attendees: Ed
Carson - Chair, Herminio Gonzalez,
There was a quorum present.
1. The agenda was modified to move approval of products to item 2 on the agenda.
Jan 28th Minutes were approved as presented.
2. Ted Berman & Associates Report
A.
Review product approval and entity applications.
The following entities were recommended for approval.
|
TST 2609 |
Architectural Testing, Inc. - |
Product Testing Laboratory |
|
TST 3892 |
Hurricane Test Laboratory, LLC -
Georgia |
Product Testing Laboratory |
|
VAL 1620 |
Window and Door Manufacturers
Association |
Product Validation Entity |
|
VAL 7331 |
American Architectural Manufacturers Association (AAMA) |
Product Validation Entity |
The following entity were recommended for denial.
|
CER 7243 |
NSF International |
Product Certification Agency |
See Administrators Final Report for Product Approval Applications details.
Committee directed staff to include as an item to add to future agenda to discuss the status of old test reports.
3. Product Approval and Entities Statistics Report. Staff presented the current entities and product statistics from inception of the program through 3/6/2008.
4. Product Approval Program Issues – Staff
Recommendations
A. Staff and Administrator sought clarification on the following issues:
The issues are as follows:
- Certification agencies are authorized to validate within their scope of accreditation and approval. The rule does not require that the certification agency must retain a Florida Professional Engineer on staff.
Staff recommends language for completion deadline to be changed as follows:
“Product Approval
applications must be submitted, validated, and reviewed by the administrator
and re-validated if needed, and given recommendations for approval by the
Administrator by this deadline date. NOTE: To allow time for preliminary
review by the Administrator, you should submit your application five days in
advance of the deadline. However, there should be no reasonable
expectation that the application will be placed on the consent agenda with an
approval recommendation, by simply meeting this time suggestion. Recommendation
for approval by the Administrator must be completed within seven days after the
deadline.
This process will allow for greater
application review and discussion time. If an applicant responds with
correct changes given by the Administrator prior to the Completion Deadline,
the application will go through and be recommended for approval. If
an applicant does not respond and any deficiencies are not rectified, the
application will be incomplete and will not be considered at this
meeting. Incomplete applications can be eligible for consideration at the
subsequent meeting if completed.
This will allow the Administrator to resolve minor outstanding issues such as receiving signed and sealed reports.
Yes, as long as the standard(s) has not changed and
the supporting documentation attest to the compliance to the 2007 code or has
no reference to the code sections that have changed in the new code. However,
should documentation reference to the code conflicts with the new code, the
manufacturer may provide documentation to substantiate compliance through the
revision process.
Answer: with exception of a valid date for QA contract, there is no expiration dates for the documents stated above in Rule 9B-72. However, in the Certification Method, the compliance documentation must be current, not expired suspended or revoked.
B. Product Approval Administrator’s Performance survey was considered by POC. Responses in the survey consisted of Good and Excellent ratings.
5. Product Approval Declaratory Statements
A. DCA08-DEC-047 by Abe Sacks,
Chairman, Structa Wire Corp
POC voted with Staff
recommendation. Structa Wire Products fall outside the scope of Rule 9B-72.
Final Comments by the Public
1)
Jaime Gascon asked a
question concerning conditional approvals as to whether conditional approvals will
have to go to the validator. The POC response was in agreement. Jaime Gascon also
requested that POC approve applications under consent by compliance methods.
The chair was in agreement.
2)
Warren Schafer
inquired whether there was any requirement to state the year in the compliance
documents for an application. The POC responded by stating that there was no
such requirement.
6. Adjourn
The
committee adjourned at: 3.20 pm
Action need by the Commission:
Commission Actions – Product Approval POC:
1. The Committee recommends the following four entities for approval:
|
TST 2609 |
Architectural Testing, Inc. - California |
Product Testing Laboratory |
|
TST 3892 |
Hurricane Test Laboratory, LLC -
Georgia |
Product Testing Laboratory |
|
VAL 1620 |
Window and Door Manufacturers
Association |
Product Validation Entity |
|
VAL 7331 |
American Architectural Manufacturers Association (AAMA) |
Product Validation Entity |
The Committee recommends the following one entity for denial:
|
CER 7243 |
NSF International |
Product Certification Agency |
2. The Committee recommends the products listed in Administrator's report be approved, deferred, conditionally approved or denied as per voted on by the Committee.