Gary Curtis opened up the CMA Ratings Subcommittee this afternoon, noting that he’s hopeful the group can come to a conclusion and move forward to the Board.A number of negative ballot responses were up for discussion.
One editorial item had to do with the language surrounding frame component simulation and whether the manufacturer “shall” or “may” submit the system assembly drawings indicating dimensions and materials.
“You do not need system assembly drawings indicating dimensions and materials to do a framed component evaluation,” explained Curtis. “This information is not needed so therefore it would be reasonable to make it optional.”
After debate, a motion passed to include this as a required item.
There was also discussion surrounding a negative from Keystone Certifications regarding the use of actual size ratings.
Roland Temple brought forward a friendly amendment to move to reword 4.2.B.vi as “actual size non-certified ratings.”
NFRC CMA Program Manager Jessica Ferris explained that a non-certified rating is calculated by the software tool, so the IA will review calculations done in CMAST by the Approved Calculation Entity (ACE).
“It’s automatically generated in CMAST at the same time as the standard rating,” said Ferris.
The motion failed 11-15. A new motion was passed to make Keystone Certification’s negative substantial and persuasive.
The subcommittee resolved all ballot comments and the CMA PCP document is set to move forward.
No comments:
Post a Comment