GARAGE DOOR SHUTTER WORKGROUP REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

NOVEMBER 13 - 14, 2006

Overview

Raul L. Rodriguez, AIA, Chair of the Florida Building Commission, has made appointments to the Garage Door and Shutter Labeling Workgroup, and they are found below. At the July 2006 Commission meeting, based on the Window Workgroup’s recommendations, the Commission created a Garage Door and Shutter Labeling Workgroup, charged with developing recommendations regarding the labeling of garage doors and shutters. As with the Window Labeling Workgroup, the focus for the Garage Door and Shutter Labeling Workgroup was to provide building officials, in a field useable format, with the information they need to ensure that garage doors and shutters comply with the Florida Building Code.

The focus for the Garage Door and Shutter Labeling Workgroup was to develop recommendations on how to provide building officials, in a field useable format, with the information they need to ensure that garage doors and shutters comply with the Florida Building Code.

Workgroup Membership

The following members were appointed to serve on the Window Workgroup:

Joe Belcher, Bob Boyer, Jack Glenn, Herminio Gonzalez, Darius Grimes, Jeffery Gross,

Joe Hetzel, Do Kim, C.W. Macomber, Frank O’Neil, Mike Salmon, Sigi Valentine, and

Dwight Wilkes.

SUMMARY OF WORKGROUP’S KEY DECISIONS

Day One Opening and Meeting Attendance

The meeting started at 1:15 PM, and the following Workgroup members were present:

Joe Belcher, Bob Boyer, Jack Glenn, Darius Grimes, Jeffery Gross, Joe Hetzel, Do Kim,

C.W. Macomber, Mike Salmon, Sigi Valentine, and Dwight Wilkes.

The Following members were absent: Herminio Gonzalez and Frank O’Neil.

Day Two Opening and Meeting Attendance

The meeting started at 9:10 AM, and the following Workgroup members were present:

Joe Belcher, Bob Boyer, Jack Glenn, Darius Grimes, Jeffery Gross, Joe Hetzel, Do Kim,

C.W. Macomber, Mike Salmon, Sigi Valentine, and Dwight Wilkes.

The Following members were absent: Herminio Gonzalez, Do Kim, and Frank O’Neil.

DCA Staff Present

Rick Dixon, Mo Madani, and Betty Stevens.

Meeting Facilitation

The meeting was facilitated by Jeff Blair from the Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium at Florida State University. Information at: http://consensus.fsu.edu/

Project Webpage

Information on the project, including agenda packets, meeting reports, and related documents may be found in downloadable formats at the project webpage below:

http://consensus.fsu.edu/FBC/gdslwg.html

Meeting Objectives

The Workgroup voted unanimously, 11 - 0 in favor, to approve the agenda as presented including the following objectives:

ü To Review Issues and Options Worksheet

ü To Identify Issues and Options for Evaluation

ü To Evaluate Options for Acceptability

ü To Consider Public Comment

ü To Adopt Package of Recommendations for Submittal to the Commission

ü To Discuss Next Steps and Recommendations Delivery Schedule

Work Group’s Decision-Making Procedures and Meeting Guidelines

Jeff Blair reviewed the Workgroup’s decision-making procedures found on page 3 of the agenda packet.

Approval of September 14, 2006 Facilitator’s Summary Report

The Workgroup voted unanimously, 11 - 0 in favor, to approve the September 14, 2006 Facilitator’s Summary Report as presented.

Overview of Workgroup’s Scope and Charge

Jeff Blair explained that the scope and purpose of the Workgroup was to provide recommendations on how to provide building officials with needed information for conducting field inspections to ensure garage doors and shutters complies with the relevant wind pressure Code requirements. The Workgroup met on September 14, 2006 and identified a list of issues and preliminary options. Members were encouraged to send in proposed options to address the identified issues prior to Meeting II, where consensus recommendations were developed.

It was explained that the Workgroup’s recommendations would be submitted to the Code Administration TAC at their December meeting, and the TAC’s comments along with the Workgroup’s recommendations, would be submitted to the Commission during the December 6, 2006 plenary session. It is anticipated that the Commission will vote on a package of recommendations related to Garage Door and Shutter Labeling, and Code amendments will be submitted for the 2007 Code Update cycle.

Jeff explained that Workgroup members are charged with representing their constituent interest groups, and should consider this in the context of the deliberations. Jeff explained that the format and process for the meeting was as follows:

For each option:

* Overview of proposed option

* General discussion with Workgroup and staff on the option

* Identification of new option(s),

* Public comment on the option,

* Initial ranking of option,

* Identification of member’s reservations (if any),

* Second ranking, if any member(s) wishes to change their ranking based on the discussion(s),

Recess—Monday, November 13, 2006

The Workgroup voted unanimously, 11 - 0 in favor, to recess at 4:55 PM.

General Public Comment

Prior to the Workgroup voting on the package of recommendations, Jeff Blair offered members of the public an additional opportunity to provide feedback to the Workgroup. Several members of the public provided comments to the Workgroup. (A summary of all comments is located in the options evaluation section of this report).

Consensus Testing and Agreement on Recommendations for Commission Submittal

The Workgroup voted unanimously 9 - 0 in favor of the package of consensus recommendations to the Code Administration TAC, and to the Commission.

Next Steps

The Code Administration TAC will review the Garage Door and Shutter labeling Workgroup’s recommendations, and make recommendations to the Commission.

The Commission will decide on the Workgroup’s recommendations at the December 2006 meeting. Proponents will be required to submit their approved recommendations as Code amendments. All Code changes will be reviewed by TAC’s per the Commission’s adopted Code review process.

Adjournment—Tuesday, November 14, 2006

The Workgroup voted unanimously, 9 – 0 in favor, to adjourn at 11:15 AM

CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATIONS

(November 2006)

Consensus recommendations are defined as those options that achieved a 75% or greater threshold of 4’s and 3’s in proportion to 2’s and 1’s.

GARAGE DOORS

Garage Doors should be labeled with a permanent label.

The label shall be provided by the manufacturer.

The design pressure, positive and negative shall be on the label.

The manufacturer’s product model/series number shall be provided on the label.

If the garage door is impact rated, the rating should be indicated on the label.

The installation drawings reference number shall be on the label.

The FL or NOA number shall be on the label, if the product has an FL or NOA.

The manufacturer’s name shall be on the label.

The test standard(s) that the door was tested to shall be on the label.

The required components of the label may be listed using a check list format on the label, the correct boxes on the checklist can be marked by the installer.

The installation instructions must be provided and available on the job site.

Definition of garage door manufacturer: The party responsible for the completed assembly of the garage door components.

A definition should be provided in the Code for permanent label. The definition proposed is a label that is not easily defeatable.

Shutters—Impact Resistant Coverings

The Workgroup proposed to change the term shutters to “impact resistant coverings”, to conform with the Code.

A permanent label shall be required on impact resistant coverings.

The label shall be provided by the product approval holder.

The following is required to be included on the Label.

· PA Holder Name and Location

· All Applicable Methods of Approval (possible methods could be)

Miami-Dade NOA; FBC 2004; TDI Product Evaluation; ICC-ES

· Qualifying Test Standard used for compliance (possible test standards could be)

TAS 201, 202, 203; SSTD 12-99 > 110 mph Wind zones;

ASTM E 1886/E 1996 Type D Wind zone I, II, II and/or IV;

ASTM E 330 (required for SSTD 12 and ASTM E 1996)

Installation instructions shall be provided and available on the job site.

The FL or NOA number shall be on the label if the product has an FL or NOA.

The Location of the Label shall be as follows:

· Accordions: Bottom of the locking bar or center mate facing outside

· Rollup: On the bottom of the hood facing outside or on the bottom slat facing outside

· Bahama Awning or Colonial Hinged: On the bottom, placed on the back of the shutter.

· Panels: For metal and plastic hurricane panels the label or embossed or printed spaced not more than every three (3) lineal feet on each panel applied by the PA holder and facing the outside.

· Framed products on the side or bottom facing outside.

· All other products facing outside.

OPTIONS ACCEPTABILITY RANKING EXERCISE

During the meeting, members were asked to develop and rank options, and following

discussions and refinements, may be asked to do additional rankings of the options as refined. Members should be prepared to offer specific refinements to address their reservations. A four-point ranking scale will be used, and in general, 4’s and 3’s indicate support and 2’s and 1’s indicate opposition to the option. A 75% threshold of 4’s and 3’s will be required for an affirmative recommendation to the Commission. The following scale will be utilized for the ranking exercise(s):

Acceptability

Ranking

Scale

4 = acceptable, I agree

3 = acceptable, I agree with minor reservations

2 = not acceptable, I don’t agree unless major reservations addressed

1 = not acceptable

Following are all of the Options that were evaluated by the Workgroup during the November 2006 meeting, along with member and public comments on each:

GARAGE DOORS

General Discussion

· Joe, installation drawings always appear at the job site. They should reflect the approval. The label is a supplement to the installation drawings. That label should be permanently attached to the garage door. No additional label is needed. The garage door manufacturers obtain approval through the test method, or rational analysis, the certification method is not used.

· Rick, windows have certification, and a label (permanent).

· Mo, the Code does not specify labels for garage doors.

· Jack, this is a staff driven process. Consider a permanent label by the manufacturer.

· Jeff, there are already products with labels, AC units, fire rated doors and door jambs. We need a permanent label, engraved, weather exposure on label.

· CW, the permanent label is necessary. Need a supplemental label for garage doors: the tracks could be changed by the installer, installer may use one door and a track from another, combinations. If there is only a permanent label that would be limiting.

· Do, a permanent label is needed, start with window workgroup recommendations, basic information.

· Sigi, permanent label with test pressure, when change design.

· Darius, installation drawings have to be on the door, a supplemental label with wind loading and design pressure is not enough.

· Jaime, labeling garage doors should be easy, the larger surface will hold a larger label, with a temporary label used for the inspector. Can stay on the door (inside of house) not exposed to weather, the information is not getting to the field for inspectors, label would have the standards, design rating, local approval is more specific.

· Joe, changing track in the field, drawings have how to install, the part numbers relate to drawings.

· Darius, could slide drawings in a plastic sleeve, adhesive backed.

· Jaime, permanent, etched, ink jet, “not easily defeatable”, intent of being permanent.

· Joe Hetzel, need to define manufacturer, outside DASMA, applied to installing doors, the party responsible for the final assembly of components, installer does not have authority to make substitutions, assembly drawings, substitution made through the manufacturer, generally accepted definition.

· Sigi, garage doors shipped from the manufacturer, not job related, no modification of door allowed.

· Darius, use an option code label, determines strength of door from testing done, cannot retrofit door, modifies spring.

· Bob, how much information needs to be on the door? How it should be installed, modifications.

· Jeff, two labels, name, model, adhesive in sleeve with instructions.

· Joe Hetzel, need understanding of how the garage door industry works, unique, when components arrive at the job site, different manufacturers do it differently, label at the point of fabrication is difficult to do, may not know what they will end up with, comes from different sources, track, hinges, rollers, manufacturer may coordinate components, permanent label installation instructions and approved drawings, cannot put on at point of fabrication.

· Mo, 1714. allows door components to be interchangeable, engineering is required.

· Jack, 1714 is the entry door section, to allow interchange of lock sets.

· Jack, concerned if allow interchange of components, adding weight to door, life safety concern. Responsibility for approval should be the manufacturer, what the components do relative to each other, permanent label, readable later, etched.

· Joe Hetzel, the party responsible for getting approval is the party responsible for the final assembly.

· Rick, approved products assembled in the field.

· Bob, the door installer uses components from different manufacturers.

· Tom Johnston, it would be good to have definitions for manufacturers, installers, what is the purpose? Burden on the inspector? Permit off a label?

· Darius, definition could be applied.

· Bob, label plus paperwork.

Option 1 — the label will be a permanent label

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

No additional comments.

Option 1A— The label shall be provided by the (manufacturer)

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Darius, there is a problem labeling every panel, already provided by manufacturer.

Option — the design pressure positive and negative shall be on the label.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

No additional comments.

Option — If the garage door is impact rated, the rating should be indicated on the label.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Some standards have several different levels of tests,

Option — the manufacturer product model/series number shall be provided on the label.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Revised

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Joe, installation drawings referenced on the label, points to model and series number, may contain multiple options, manufacturer selects from the drawings.

· Joe, installation reference drawing numbers, will give what is needed.

Option — The installation drawings reference number

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Revised

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Dwight, permanent label from the manufacturer, assembly of components can change the rating on the door? How would it be permanently engraved on label?

· Darius, manufacturers require drawings on the label, traceable drawings and label in the package.

· Jack, if manufacturer assembles, who will provide label.

· Darius, multiple, series of options door can be assembled, generic label, installer checks off.

· Jeff, the permit requires product approval, job site switching out is local.

Option — FL or NOA number should be on the label if the product has an FL or NOA.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Darius, as test standards change, requires printing labels, complies with year of approval associated with the number.

· Jack, optional state approval, local approval is required.

Option — The manufacturer’s name should be on the label.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

No additional comments.

Option 2—Values are only applicable when completed installation is in accordance with referenced installation drawings. (regarding rated design pressure, and if impact rated)

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Revised

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Sigi, confused with design and test pressure which is based on the standard tested to, not listed design pressures.

· Darius, impact cycle rated, same except TAS 201, 202, based on design pressure of door, refers to design pressure, structural load test.

· Jack, redundant.

· Jeff, keep it simple, can add information if desired.

· Joe Belcher, info is already there.

Option — The test standard(s) door is tested to.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Joe Hetzel, options outside HVHZ, manufacturer can test to 108 or 202, does not tell which was tested to, can imply tested to.

· ANSI DASMA 108 or TAS 202.

· Jaime, codes will determine options.

· Darius, other standards for other states will be on the label.

· Joe B., standards for the FBC.

· Darius, a minimum requirement that the tests be on the label.

Option — Required components of the label may be listed using a check list format on the label, check list can be marked by the installer

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Revised

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Darius, see sample label.

· Dwight, marking permanent label is not new, identifies critical information.

· Do, ask installer to identify who he is.

· Joe H. supplemental label with installer identified.

· Jaime, manufacturer should be on the permanent label.

· Joe H., based on approved installation drawings.

Option—A supplemental label is required.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

No additional comments.

Option —The installation instruction must be attached to the door at the time of inspection.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Dwight, how is it attached, the Code specifies that the drawings must be available at the time of inspection.

· Mo, already in the Code.

· Do, can’t find the drawings on the job site for the inspector.

Installation instructions must be provided on the job site with the door (vote 1)

Installation instructions must be provided and available on the job site. (vote 2)

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Revised

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Jack, must be on the job site.

· CW, manufacturers need to provide the definition.

· Joe, definition of manufacturer: the entity/party responsible for the final assembly of garage door components.

Option — Definition of garage door manufacturer: the party responsible for

The completed assembly of the garage door components.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Revised

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Rick, assembly of the package of garage door components.

· Do, does not specify manufacturer.

· Dwight, assembler putting together.

Provide definition in the Code for permanent label. The definition proposed is a label that is not

easily defeatable.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Jack, what does easily defeatable mean?

Option — The Installer will identify who he is on a supplemental label.

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Jack, no licensing required for installer, not required for building department, subcontractor of the permit holder.

· Dwight, general contractor is responsible, manufacturer sold the product.

· Rick, actual instructions with pressure rating on the door? Drawing has to be on the door.

· Joe B., garage door replacements do not have contractors involved.

· Dwight, retrofit doors require contractor in some jurisdictions.

SHUTTERS—IMPACT RESISTANT COVERINGS

Public Comment:

· Tom Johnston, the shutter field is different and unique.

· Definition for shutters, non-glazed impact protective devices.

Option — change the term shutter to impact resistant coverings, as per the Code.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Darius, a code modification addressed this, the term shutter is used in Rule 9B-72.

· Joe Belcher, they are called impact resistant covering in the Supplement.

· Jeff, shutter is the traditional name.

Option — A permanent label shall be required on impact resistant coverings.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Darius, insurance companies, shutters does not capture all products.

· Joe B., could be opening protecting devices, net products.

· Jack, the Code allows homeowners to attach.

Option — A supplemental label shall be required on impact resistant coverings.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Jack, no need if sufficient information is on the permanent label, anyone can stick on a supplemental label.

· Do, not needed.

This option was replaced/substituted.

Option — The label shall be provided by the (manufacturer) for impact resistant coverings.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Sigi, installer not necessarily sold by manufacturer.

· Jack, define manufacturer, is a manufacturer and not an installer.

· Do, the manufacturer may not be the installer.

· Darius, association manufacturers, some hold approvals and sell all components.

· Tom, definition of manufacturer, assembler, fabricator (Darius will provide).

· Kari H., impact resistant coverings does not include plywood.

Manufacturer: is the holder of the product approval.

No vote was taken on this proposal.

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Darius, cottage industry, developer gets product approval.

· Jack, works for state product approval.

· Joe, local approval applies locally.

· Jaime, we are relying on a system that is not 100% there. The state has issued approvals to associations, fabricators who may not have obtained approval through the state.

This definition was substituted for the above proposal: No support 1-9 on a straw poll vote.

Manufacturer: the party responsible for the complete assembly of the shutter components.

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Jaime, fabricator of product, quality assurance, certified installers.

· Jack, define who is responsible to provide the label.

This definition (below) was proposed as an attempt to bridge differences in proposals:

Replaces vote on who provides the label, and any definition of “manufacturer.

This option was replaced/substituted.

The label shall be provided by the party responsible for the complete assembly of the impact

resistant covering’s components.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

Member’s expressed concern that the manufactures voted against this, this must be addressed in any agreement on who provides the label.

Member’s agreed to vote on a substitute option/proposal (see below).

Option — The label shall be provided by the product approval holder. Replaces all options

voted on above.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Joe, supports new statement.

· Dwight, Needs label on the product to verify installation.

· CW, likes defining label, label needs to come from someone, ASSA group product approval, their labels held by ASSA or members? Certification agencies allow manufacturer to print labels?

· Mo, for windows, we did not address who should provide the label, Chapter 17, there are a number of definitions, approved fabricator, defines label, manufacturer indication, mark.

· Jack, if there is no confidence in the label, who produces it.

· Joe Belcher, the industry wants the label coming from the holder of the product approval.

· Tom, association product approval, people use that product approval, licensed by group, provides liability for product, association buys parts approved by the association, nothing is reformed or reshaped, not resized. Can only access the components tested.

· Sigi, previously had approved manufacturer on the label.

· Joe Hetzel, how is product approval obtained? Architect and engineer product approval.

Assembler/ Fabricator: is the entity or individual using the PA, and produces a product from parts provided from an approved vendor(s).

10 voted (unanimous) not to define this.

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Darius, with some systems, purchase parts and assemble.

· Jaime, define as fabricators, cutting parts, could meet or exceed manufacturer’s approval. Different mountings, notches, fitting the part to fit application.

· Tom Johnson, separate installation issues from fabricator. Asking for mandatory product permits. Manufacturer has product approval. Supplier sends to dealer, can’t alter, installer may try to alter the product. Fabricator goes to two sources to pull something together, third party assurance. Assembler goes through QA.

· Rick, create a system for the building inspector to apply, not creating industry specific definitions. Under roll roofing, machine manufacturer holding product approval (fabricator) verifies calibration, etc.

· Sigi, who is the holder of the product approval?

· Darius, the manufacturer holds the product approval, if fabricator, becomes the manufacturer if they get their own product approval.

· Jack, definitions based on chapter and section confounds the problem. Definition needs to stand on its own.

· Jaime, define manufacturer as the party responsible for complete assembly of components?

Option — The design pressure positive and negative shall be on the label.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Jaime, disagrees that design pressure needs to be on the permanent label. Design pressure is not an option. Manufacturer does not know which will be used.

· Sigi, two issues, impact test method 1886, 1996, no standard for testing shutters. What is the design pressure for shutters? Structural, cyclic conditions.

· Jack, industry concern?

· Tom, strongly agrees with Jaime to avoid misuse of product. Nothing stopping installer from cutting in the field. Information needs to come from product approval drawings. Changing mounting conditions will affect resistance. Inspector needs to look at the document and not on the label.

· Joe Belcher, product approval documents have drawings, too much information for a label.

· Darius, shutter does not have a standard, structural load test required.

· CW, concerns with the DP on label, minimum information to be provided on the label?

· Jeff, label opening or components of opening? Label each panel? Custom label for whole opening?

The proposal below was substituted for the other individual components/options for what should be on the label.

Option 1—What is required to be included on the Label.

PA Holder Name and Location

All Applicable Methods of Approval (possible methods could be)

Miami-Dade NOA; FBC 2004; TDI Product Evaluation; ICC-ES

Qualifying Test Standard used for compliance (possible test standards could be)

TAS 201, 202, 203; SSTD 12-99 > 110 mph Wind zones;

ASTM E 1886/E 1996 Type D Wind zone I, II, II and/or IV;

ASTM E 330 (required for SSTD 12 and ASTM E 1996)

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Sigi, building official is used to seeing design pressure.

· Darius, list test method on label.

· Joe Hetzel, varying wind speed? Mix wind zones?

· Joe Belcher, wind speed, wind zones established by local authority, indicate on label?

· Darius, list under limits of use on installation drawings for product approval.

· Other areas of country may accept SSTD 12.

· List 2 test methods if using SSTD 12.

Option — Installation instructions must be provided and available on the job site.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

No additional comments.

Option — Reference whether the Approved System is Porous (requires deflection spacing under all test standards) or Non-Porous (requires deflection spacing within the HVHZ but not outside the HVHZ if included in the installation drawings and approvals).

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Joe Hetzel, important to building official? Misleading to the consumer?

· CW, not important to building official.

· Rick, how does the building official know it has been spaced correctly?

· Darius, redundant, on first page of installation instructions.

· Jack, redundant.

Option —Reference Installation Drawing # with the following note: Approval of this product is valid when completed installation is in compliance with the referenced installation drawings.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Darius, manufacturer can add this if they want it, should not be required.

Option — FL or NOA number should be on the label if the product has an FL or NOA.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

No additional comments.

Option — the PA holder’s product model/series number shall be provided on the label.

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Revised Vote

Based on the discussion(s)

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Darius, drawing number is tied to specific model or series, redundant.

· Tom, drawing per product, problem with amount of times adjust embossing wheels, burden on manufacturer. Product approval number and drawing number.

Location of the Label

Option 1—The location where the impact resistant covering should be labeled.

· Accordions- bottom of the locking bar or center mate facing outside

· Rollup- On the bottom of the hood facing outside or on the bottom slat facing outside

· Bahama Awning or Colonial Hinged- on the bottom, placed on the back of the shutter.

· Panels- For metal and plastic hurricane panels the label is (one label per opening 5 -5, fails) or embossed or printed spaced not more than every three (3) lineal feet on each panel applied by the PA holder and facing the outside.

· Framed products on the side or bottom facing outside.

· All other products facing outside

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· CW, does not address films, impact resistant rating.

· Tom, product approval does not work, outside scope of the Rule 9B-72.

· Jack, does not comply with Code.

Option — The installation drawings reference number, where there is not another approval (i.e., FL/NOA).

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

No additional comments.

Option — Permanent label shall be required to have installation drawing reference number where there is not another approval number

4=acceptable

3= minor reservations

2=major reservations

1= not acceptable

Initial Ranking

11/06

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Jaime, why reference anything else? Requiring information to be at the job site is sufficient, not needed.

· Joe Hetzel, always an approval number? Local approval numbers, west coast, drawing number should be on there.

· Tom, in place of what?

· CW, should not mandate how local approval is done.

· Rick, make inspection easier for inspectors.

No vote taken on these options, member’s agreed they are not needed, or are covered in other options/proposals.

Option — If the impact resistant coverings is impact rated, the rating should be indicated

on the label.

Member’s Comments and Reservations (November 2006):

· Darius, test standard to be provided?

· Joe Belcher, large, medium, small missile? Pound, ft. per second, not manufactured for small missile.

· Jack, do we need a label?

· Darius, industry recommendations, page 8.

Option — The manufacturer’s name should be on the label.

Option — The test standard(s) the impact resistant covering was tested to.

Option —The required components of the label may be listed using a check list format on the label, check list can be marked by the installer.

NOVEMBER 13 - 14, 2006

Tampa, Florida

NOVEMBER 13 - 14, 2006

Overview

Workgroup Membership

SUMMARY OF WORKGROUP’S KEY DECISIONS

Day One Opening and Meeting Attendance

Day Two Opening and Meeting Attendance

Meeting Facilitation

Project Webpage

Recess—Monday, November 13, 2006

· PA Holder Name and Location

PA Holder Name and Location