NADRA Code Update: What Happens in Vegas…

By Glenn Mathewson, NADRA Technical Advisor

…doesn’t stay in Vegas, at least not when it’s about deck code!  Here’s a recap of what to expect in your 2021 International Residential Code from the ICC Public Comment Hearing that occurred in Las Vegas last week.  This information is as fresh as it gets, because NADRA members don’t chase behind future codes, they are part of their creation.

Proposals that did not receive any public comment disputing the committee decision at the first hearing in May are lumped together in a “consensus vote” and these are as good as done.  Here are the proposals the committee approved and will be in the 2021 code.

  • RB187-19:  The organization of footing depth and frost protection provisions have been modified for better comprehension.  Frost protection for decks, previously in the foundation chapter, are now located alongside other deck provisions in the deck section 507.  An added bonus for the free market is a new method for frost protection: “Other approved method of frost protection”.  This will help new innovations that provide protection equivalent to digging a deep hole to have a better chance of being evaluated and approved for use.
  • RB188-19:  A minor change in wording makes it clear that a multi-ply beam must be fastened “together”.
  • RB189-19:  A minor change in wording clarifies that allowable beam cantilevers beyond an end post are based on the actual adjacent span of the beam, not the allowable span.
  • RB190-19:  Many don’t realize that the maximum allowable beam spans, based on the joist spans they carry, are actually sized assuming the joists are cantilevered beyond the beam by their maximum allowable distance.  When not cantilevering joists past a beam, this left beams significantly oversized.  A new modification footnote is now added to the beam span table to allow adjustments based on various percentages of joist cantilever and zero cantilever.  No longer will a beam span be limited based on loads that don’t exist.  This is a huge win for prescriptive deck designs to be closer to the actual design and not a “one-size-fits-all approach”.
  • RB191-19:  With the increase of deck designs and patterns in the industry, many decks are built with decking supported by only two joists and having only one span.  However, decking is not tested or evaluated for performance in this manner, manufactured or wood.  Technically speaking, they are not allowed to be installed in that manner without alternative approval, such as from an engineer.  To support decking designs with validated spans for “single span decking” the maximum joist spacing for wood decking table has been expanded.  5/4-inch wood decking is now provided single span limits of 12 inches for perpendicular installations and 8 inches for diagonal.  Those may appear as new limitations in deck construction, but they are actually new allowances.  What has been being done was never actually supported by the code.  Now it is.  It’s important to note that for manufactured decking, this change can’t be done in the IRC.  The testing standard must be changed.

Three of our proposals were turned down at the committee hearing, and we wrote public comments to give them a second chance.  Another one that was approved received an outside comment and thus needed reconsideration.  The results from the membership vote at the final hearings last week are not the final votes.  Governmental members will still have time after the hearings to make an online vote.  This can change the outcome, but here’s how those proposals currently stand.

  • RB46-19:  Guards and handrails are like peanut butter and jelly.  Just because they can be in the same sandwich, doesn’t mean they are the same thing.  Both are required to resist a 200 lb. concentrated load in “any direction”.  While handrails are meant for someone to purposefully brace themselves while ascending or descending obstacles, like stairs and ramps, guards are only meant to barricade an accidental fall over the edge of the deck.  This proposal changed the loading direction for guards to be only outward and downward and argued that guards don’t need to resist an inward or upward load of that magnitude.  The committee turned this down at the last hearing and said it was the decision of the American Society of Civil Engineers.  The ICC membership at the hearing last week disagreed, and through their professional experience in analyzing guards in backyards across this county, decided to make the decision.  The IRC has now broken away from the singular power of the ASCE to allow a wider diversity of professionals to develop residential codes.  There is value here far beyond this one proposal.  Much like rallying NADRA involvement in development of deck codes, no single group of professionals should be making any rules in our private homes.  That is the beauty of the transparent ICC development process.  Though the final vote is given only to governmental members (a single group of professionals), they are the only group free from financial interest or professional gain from the results.
  • RB184:  This was our biggest proposal and with modifications, the ICC membership voted it with a 98% approval!  That’s a great way to start the online voting and a good sign this will make it in the future code.  Here are some bullets of what this large proposal offers.
  • Design tables are increased for 50, 60, and 70 psf snow load regions, making the code more useful to more builders in the country and reducing the need for specific engineering.
    • The absolute minimum diameter footing was reduced from an excessive 14-inch diameter to as low as 8-inch diameter when supporting deck areas up to 5 square feet.  (consider a small stair landing with four footings/piers)
    • The post sizing table was expanded and based on the actual loads the post is carrying.  No longer are there single limits for post height based only on the heaviest possible loading.  Like with beams and joists cantilevers, previously mentioned, it’s no longer “one-size-fits-all”.
    • The joist span tables have been revised so that maximum cantilevers of joists are no longer based on the maximum allowable span of joists, but by their actual span.  Like other modifications, this allows design limits to be based on the actual deck design.
  • RB185-19:  This proposal was approved by the committee in the first hearing but received a public comment that fixed an oversight in the first proposal.  It was then approved by the membership.  New provisions prohibiting the notching of 4×4 guard posts at the connection point were included alongside language requiring guard post connection to tie into the overall framing of the deck, and not just a single side joist.  Without limiting guard design and construction methods and without providing any specific graphics, this proposal will support better guard construction without a loss in architectural freedom.
  • RB301-19:  Of all our proposals and all our testimony to other proposals, this was the only one that we didn’t win.  Turned down at the committee hearings, this proposal would have provided specific details for guard post connections in an appendix chapter.  An appendix chapter is optional and must be individually adopted by a government.  Though our industry fears pictures in the code (think…lateral load anchor), the compromise with others who don’t share this fear was to put them in an appendix.  The details provided engineered methods of resisting a 200 lb. load on a single post using either metal hardware or only commodity fasteners.  Through much debate and mutual compromise, the Deck Code Coalition was still unable to provide unified testimony in support of this proposal.  The membership did not approve it.

Modifications to these proposals can no longer be made in this cycle, as all that is left is the final online vote by the governmental members. 

By the end of this year, the 2021 IRC will be decided.

To help NADRA continue our work in the code arena, please consider contributing to our code fundraising initiative. Click here to learn more and to support our efforts.

Presidential Proclamation on National Forest Products Week, 2019

DONALD J. TRUMP

Our Nation’s forests and woodlands provide millions of Americans with an abundance of job opportunities, goods, and recreational activities.  During National Forest Products Week, we pay tribute to the forest products industry for the important contributions it makes to our society and economy, and we recommit to keeping our wooded landscapes vibrant and strong.

Ninety-six percent of the industrial wood used in the United States comes directly from domestic supplies, making the forest products sector a truly American industry.  The millions of acres of forests across our country supply the resources for paper and packaging materials, lumber for our homes, renewable energy materials, and countless other products.  In addition to the tremendous impact the forest products industry has on our economy, businesses in this sector are at the forefront of conservation efforts, practicing responsible resource management and maintaining a strong commitment to preserving our abundant forests.

My Administration is working to protect our Nation’s forests so that the forest products industry can continue to manufacture goods for domestic and global markets.  Last year, I signed an Executive Order aimed at increasing responsible forest management and coordinating Federal, State, tribal, and local assets to prevent and combat the wildfires that have sadly devastated parts of our Nation’s woodlands.  I also signed the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, which will help preserve the health of our forests and increase economic opportunities for the entire forest products sector.  This bipartisan legislation promotes active management of natural resources, including our forests, and maintains strong rural development and research initiatives that benefit communities where the forest products industry drives local economies.  It also promotes using America’s forest materials, like cross-laminated timber — a strong, resilient product — as an innovative approach to constructing tall wooden buildings.

This week, we recognize the importance of the raw materials our forested lands supply for the production of goods throughout our country and around the world.  We also pledge to support the proper management of our forests and woodlands so that they can continue to help power our economy and provide recreational opportunities for Americans for generations to come.

Recognizing the economic value of the products yielded in our Nation’s forests, the Congress, by Public Law 86–753 (36 U.S.C. 123), as amended, has designated the week beginning on the third Sunday in October of each year as “National Forest Products Week” and has authorized and requested the President to issue a proclamation in observance of this week.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim October 20 through October 26, 2019, as National Forest Products Week.  I call upon all Americans to observe this week with appropriate ceremonies and activities and to reaffirm our commitment to our Nation’s forests.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eighteenth day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand nineteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-fourth.

DONALD J. TRUMP

NADRA Code Update: Should Decks be Built Like Stairs?

October 2019 Update

By: Glenn Mathewson

Some believe they should.  Stair treads must resist the same uniform load as decking, but with an added requirement to resist a 300 lb. concentrated load at mid span.  Consider the impact your feet place on treads as you come running down them. This extra requirement is not without consequences, as spans allowed for composite decking are often reduced when used for stair treads.  Many products require minimum 12- or 10-inch stringer spacing. This could be the future for joist spacing. Do I have your attention?

Though NADRA has been involved in the International Residential Code modification process, there are many other organizations and processes that affect the codes and standards of the decking and railing industry.  The American Society of Civil Engineers is one such organization. They develop the ASCE 7 standard, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, which establishes the minimum design loads historically copied into the International Code Council’s (ICC) building and residential codes.  

In the ICC hearings, NADRA has supported a proposal to adjust the loading direction required of guards that was submitted to the International Residential Code (IRC) development process this year.  At the ICC hearings, the committee did not approve the change and requested it first be made in the ASCE 7 standard. We will contest this at the IRC final hearings this week, but we also turned our attention to the ASCE standard development process.  Last week, by luck, the ASCE committee was meeting in Denver, and with a short drive and NADRA support, I was able to attend.

Though I was going there for the guard proposal, another one came up, and my concerns for guards were quickly replaced with decking.  A proposal was received to require all deck boards to resist a 300 lb. concentrated load at mid span, just as is required for stair treads.  The committee discussed the reasoning, that ladders can place a concentrated load on a single deck board upwards of this magnitude. Prior to closing their discussion, they invited comment from guests. .

I shared concerns of proposals that place additional loads on decks different than inside a house, where ladders could similarly be used.  I explained how composite decking spans are reduced when used on stairs and subjected to a 300 lb. design load. I asked if they had the data on how wood and manufactured decking product maximum spans would be affected by the proposal.

It appeared this analysis was not included with the proposal, but the committee was interested.  They turned the question back to me—to NADRA… Now the ball is in our court to answer. How will this affect our industry?  Will current composite decking formulations on the market require a reduction of joist spacing to support this load? Will manufacturers “simply” change formulations and retest in order to maintain current spans?  Will joist spacing for wood decking require reduction?

We are working on some of these answers, but you should be too.

Because this could become the new rule.

Deckorators® Booth to Host “The Ultimate Deck Podcast” at DeckExpo 2019

Popular podcast for deck builders coming to booth 1019 

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich., October 1, 2019 – Deckorators® a leading manufacturer of composite decking, deck railing, balusters, post caps and related products, will host The Ultimate Deck Podcast in booth 1019 at DeckExpo 2019, Nov. 7-8 at the Kentucky International Convention Center in Louisville, Kentucky.

Hosted by Shane Chapman, Wade Laurent and Justin MacRae of The Ultimate Deck Shop in Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada, The Ultimate Deck Podcast discusses the deck-building industry, its people and the insights North American deck contractors need to be successful. The popular podcast will be recorded live in DeckExpo booth 1019 on Thursday, Nov. 7, from 1 to 4 p.m. and Friday, Nov. 8, from 9 a.m. to noon.

Chapman, Laurent and MacRae will capture their conversations with fellow deck builders, manufacturer representatives and other show attendees for their listeners on Podbean, Apple Podcasts and other podcast streaming services.

Guests expected to appear on the podcast to discuss new products, tips and trends include:

  • Sean Collinsgru, owner of Premier Outdoor Living LLC, Palmyra, New Jersey.
  • Leif Wirtanen, integrator and operations manager at Cascade Fence & Deck, Vancouver, Washington.
  • Joe Hagen, founder and president of All Decked Out, Cincinnati, Ohio.
  • Additional Deckorators Certified Pros, industry personalities and representatives from manufacturers such as CAMO.

“The Ultimate Deck Podcast hosts give contractors and dealers an honest, inside look at the decking industry,” said Chris Camfferman, managing director, marketing for Deckorators. “As members of the building industry themselves, they offer listeners valuable opinions and ideas. We’re excited to partner with The Ultimate Deck Shop to bring the conversations of DeckExpo to those in the industry who are not in attendance.”

In addition to hosting the podcast, Deckorators will launch several exciting new products at the annual show, which is co-located with the Remodeling Show. Deckorators will also host an Instagram MeetUp (InstaMeet) at 2 p.m. on Thursday in booth 1019 for the growing community of deck builders on the social media network.

For more information on Deckorators, visit www.Deckorators.com/DeckExpo or visit booth 1019 in Louisville. For more about The Ultimate Deck Shop, visit www.ultimatedeckshop.com; listen to The Ultimate Deck Podcast on Podbean, Apple Podcasts and other podcast streaming services; and watch The Ultimate Deck Show on YouTube.

About Deckorators

Deckorators, the first name in decking, railing and accessories and the originator of the round aluminum baluster, is a brand of Universal Consumer Products, Inc., a subsidiary of Universal Forest Products, Inc. Deckorators started the low-maintenance aluminum balusters category with the Classic Series and has since led the industry with many new and innovative decking and railing products. Its approach to developing exciting and distinctive products allows both DIYers and builders to bring the personal creativity of interior design to outdoor living.

To learn more about Deckorators decking and railing accessories, visit www.deckorators.com or call 800-332-5724.

Follow Deckorators on Instagram: @Deckorators
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Deckorators
YouTube: www.youtube.com/DeckoratorsProducts
Pinterest: www.pinterest.com/deckorators 

UNIVERSAL FOREST PRODUCTS, INC. (NASDAQ: UFPI)

Universal Forest Products, Inc., soon to be known as UFP Industries, Inc., is a holding company that provides capital, management and administrative resources to subsidiaries that supply wood, wood composite and other products to three robust markets: retail, construction and industrial. Founded in 1955, the Company is headquartered in Grand Rapids, Mich., with affiliates throughout North America, Europe, Asia and Australia. For more about Universal Forest Products, go to www.ufpi.com.

###

AZEK BUILDING PRODUCTS PARTNERS WITH SNAVELY FOREST PRODUCTS

September 23, 2019 11:46 ET Source: AZEK Building Products

Chicago, Ill., Sept. 23, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — AZEK Building Products, a leading manufacturer of premium outdoor building materials, has announced a new partnership with Snavely Forest Products. The leading wholesale distributor of building products plans to offer the full lines of TimberTech® and AZEK®Exteriors products in key locations throughout Colorado and Wyoming.

“We are excited to partner with AZEK Building Products, a company that values quality products and prioritizes environmentally conscious manufacturing practices,” said Clark Spitzer, COO of Snavely Forest Products. “It’s well-known in the industry that they’re a first-class company with an outstanding reputation of excellence. Their long-standing commitment to sustainability and achieving the highest level of recycling in the decking industry perfectly aligns with our core values.”

The TimberTech and AZEK Exteriors portfolio of products provides customers with a range of high performance, low maintenance alternatives to wood. The products are made from a majority of recycled polymer to create an eco-friendly product with unrivaled style and versatility.

“It’s an honor to partner with Snavely Forest Products, a company with over 100 years of rich history of providing customers with the best building products in the industry,” said Joe Ochoa, president of AZEK Building Products. “By partnering with distributors who value sustainability and exceptional customer service, we all benefit from the opportunity of an even greater, collective commitment to service and innovation.”

AZEK Building Products manufactures all products in the United States. Snavely Forest Products partners with both domestic and international manufacturers to bring the very best building products to their customers. Together, they are set to partner at distribution centers across Colorado and Wyoming with potential to expand to other locations in the future. 

For more information on AZEK Building Products, visit TimberTech.com and AZEKexteriors.com.

For more information on Snavely Forest Products, visit snavelyforest.com.

###

About AZEK Building Products

AZEK Building Products, a division of The AZEK Company, manufactures home building materials under two divisions: TimberTech® and AZEK® Exteriors. TimberTech offers a premium portfolio of capped polymer and capped composite decking – as well as railing, porch, lighting and paver products – while AZEK Exteriors manufactures distinctly unique trim and moulding. Together the brands present homeowners, builders, architects, dealers and contractors with a comprehensive suite of first-rate products that are long lasting, sustainable alternatives to wood. AZEK is headquartered in Chicago, IL (with plants in OH and PA) and also owns business operations of Minneapolis-based Ultralox railing systems. For more information visit AZEKCo.com or call 1-877-275-2935. 

About Snavely Forest Products

Founded in 1902, Snavely Forest Products (www.snavelyforest.com) is a recognized leader in the wholesale lumber industry. Delivering superior material, exceptional service and market expertise to both customers and vendors, clearly expresses a commitment to “Building Business for Our Partners”. Snavely Forest Products’ goal is to provide its customer’s access to the world’s best building products at competitive prices.

Tyler Rabel
Two by Four
312-445-4728
trabel@twoxfour.com

NADRA Code Update – Proposals RB185-19 and RB301-19 Guard Post Connections

August 29th, 2019

By: Glenn Mathewson

The latest 2018 edition of the International Residential Code provides a complete package of prescriptive structural design tables for decks… sort of…  When we think of structural design, most people imagine the skeleton of ledgers, joists, beams, and posts. At this completion, one might be ready for a “rough frame” inspection.  Install the decking and you’ve got a system that will hold people up, but it won’t keep them up. There’s a critical structural component of elevated decks that’s missing.

Guards.

Guards are barriers required at the edges of raised floors that help keep us from falling off.  They can be rails, cables or pipes. They can be wood, metal, vinyl, or glass. They can be benches, planter boxes, outdoor kitchens, or privacy walls.  Architecturally, they can be practically anything that meets the minimum height, maximum openings, and minimum structural capacity. Indeed, guards are part of the deck structure.  Table 301.5 requires a live load resistance of 200 lbs. in any direction along the top of the guard, but stops there. There is no guidance in the code for how to achieve this.

NADRA supported a proposal with others in the Deck Code Coalition to change that.  After many meetings with discussions ranging from a complete detail of guard construction to not adding anything, compromise (which is not a negative thing) and shared perspectives led us to common ground.  The proposal would prohibit a few notorious problems and provide some general language about the load path. This would be a good start. This is proposal RB185-19, and it was approved at the IRC Committee Action Hearing this March.  Here is a brief, bulleted summary of what it includes.

  • Guard posts must be connected into the deck framing, not just the outer joist or beam, where such member can rotate under load.
  • Guard posts cannot be fastened only into the end-grain of lumber.
  • Guard posts mounted on top of the deck (surface mounted) must be done according the manufacturer installation instruction and must connect to the deck framing or blocking.
  • Wood 4×4 guard posts cannot be notched at the point of connection.

While this will reduce the most egregious guard connections and make a big impact on safety, it still doesn’t provide any assurance of any guard construction capability.  That’s what proposal RB301-19 provides.

With such variety of guard design, it’s difficult to specify one method, and it risks all other designs being considered “noncompliant”.  Something common, however, to many guards is a wood post. This second guard proposal provides a handful of engineered methods to attach a guard post to wood deck framing that will meet the loads required by the IRC.  Methods using hardware and methods using only commodity fasteners are provided for design flexibility. These details are proposed for a new appendix chapter in the IRC, so they are not misunderstood as a strict requirement.  Appendix chapters are optional unless adopted as mandatory by a government. They provide guidance, and that is exactly the intent of the appendix we have proposed. This proposal was not approved at the first hearing, but we received good feedback as to why.  NADRA and the DCC members got back together and kept at it. We submitted a public comment in hopes of earning the ICC governmental membership approval this October at the Final Action Hearings.

Please support RB185-19 and RB301-19 and help us develop quality minimum standards for safe deck design and construction, while balancing affordability and freedom.

NADRA CODE UPDATE

August 14th, 2019

By: Glenn Mathewson

Proposal RB190 – Table R507.5

Through the efforts of NADRA.org and other organizations and professionals, the 2015 IRC revealed the first deck beam-sizing table (Table R507.5) to ever be included in a US model code.  It provides maximum spans of simple deck beams based on different loading, species, profiles, and number of plies of common lumber.  It was a welcome addition for building departments that have long struggled to approve deck designs without requiring an engineer and without having to develop their own span tables, as many had done.  The American Wood Council (AWC) created their popular document, DCA6, to help alleviate this problem and provide pre-engineered design tables.  These tables would become the 2015 provisions, and still today the AWC provides the engineering for most of the new deck structural provisions.  For contractors working in regions not utilizing the DCA6, the new tables came as a little shock.  In comparing the beams spans that have been acceptable, the new IRC tables cut them down dramatically.  Why?

Creating a pre-engineered design table is not necessarily simple, specifically for beams.  To provide a maximum allowable beam span, the load the beam is supporting has to be known.  In its most simple form, a beam supports joists of the same length and carries half that length.  A ledger, presumably, is carrying the other half.  Those same joists, however, could cantilever beyond the beam, and the beam would support the entire load of the cantilever.  This is just one design variable of many.  A beam could be at an angle and support a non-uniform load along its length, or it could be supporting joists spanning from both sides.  Currently none of those variables are provided in the code.

Why did many allowable beam spans suddenly reduce with the new code?  The table is calculated on the assumption that every beam is supporting maximum-cantilevered joists.  In many cases, joists can cantilever beyond the beam up to 1/4 their span, and that’s a lot of added load…load that is being designed for every time, whether there or not.  Consider a deck with a 12 ft. joist span and no cantilever.  The beam is actually carrying 6 feet of joist, but the code is sizing it as if it’s carrying 9 ft., because it’s assuming the maximum allowable 3 ft. joist cantilever is there.  If you did cantilever the joist the maximum distance, the table is accurate.  If you didn’t, your beam spans are unnecessarily restricted…significantly.  Okay—Let’s fix that!

The NADRA proposal RB190 adds a footnote to the beam span table with a set of modifiers.  The modifiers allow you to alter the input “joist span” in the beam span table based on different percentages of joist cantilever from zero to one-fourth.  Included are cantilevers of 1/12, 1/10, 1/8, 1/6, and the maximum 1/4 of the joist span.  Currently, a (2) 2×10 southern pine beam supporting a 12 ft. joist span is restricted 7 ft. – 4 in., REGARDLESS of whether the joists cantilever or not.  With RB190’s modifiers, if the joists don’t cantilever, the 12 ft. span can be multiplied by .66 to yield an equivalent span of 8 ft.  Using this value in the table results in an accurate maximum beam span of 9 ft.  That’s no small margin from the current 7 ft. – 4 inch maximum!  There is no reason not to allow beams to be sized for their actual loads, and possibly reduce some costs or visually obstructive posts from our neighbors’ backyards.

Proposal RB190 was prompted by NADRA, developed with the help of the Deck Code Coalition, and engineered by the American Wood Council.  It is solid engineering in a solid concept.  It was approved at the Committee Action Hearings with no opposition.  There is good reason to believe it will make it through the last part of the ICC code development process, the Final Action Hearing.

Please support proposal RB190 and let’s maintain an appropriate balance between safety, design freedom, and affordability. 

Please contact NADRA for any questions or concerns regarding this proposal.  We welcome your conversation. You can send an email to Info@NADRA.org

NADRA Code Update

July 3rd, 2019

By: Glenn Mathewson

To finish a marathon, you’ve got to push through the last mile.  Such is the same with developing a new edition of the International Residential Code.  Thousands of people are currently running a marathon toward the 2021 IRC, and though they are halfway through, there’s no telling who (or who’s proposals) will make it to the finish line.  While it’s too soon to start cheering, it’s not to soon to feel confident and strong, and that’s how the NADRA and Deck Code Coalition proposals are looking.

With the publishing of the final report from the Committee Action Hearings, the public can not only see the results of the hearing, but also a summary of the comments made by the committee.  There are three result categories, but since those aren’t “final” results, the comments should be the focus.  The committee comments could be looked at as spectators cheering on or booing the runners.  They provide direction, encouragement, and suggestions, much like “you got this! Keep going! You’re so close”.  Unfortunately, sometimes the comments can feel more like “you’re never going to make it! Give up now!  You look so tired!”

The race is not over until you pass the finish line, and sometimes people get a second wind.  That’s what the next phase of the code modification process can offer—a second chance.  Regardless of the committee result, every proposal can receive a public comment modification, and if received, the proposal will be heard again at the final hearings, where a final vote will be made…but not really.  The final vote is actually made online a few weeks after the hearing.  In this vote, only governmental ICC members can cast the final thumbs up or thumbs down.   These members could vote down a proposal approved by the committee, and likewise, the members could turn around a proposal disapproved by the committee.

Public comments to the committee results are due July 24th and these will be the catalyst for the next step in the process.  A proposal that does not receive a public comment is almost certain to be finalized as-is in the “bulk vote” where the governmental members vote for the entire package of proposals.  Having not received any disagreement from the public, the assumption is that the committee opinion is good to go.  Here is the part to pay close attention to:

If the committee result for a proposal is not challenged by July 24th, consider it done.  If there is something you don’t like, silence is equivalent to support.

So let me put it this way…  “Speak now or forever hold your peace”.

Okay…that’s not exactly true, but you would have to hold it until the 2024 IRC code development hearings where everything is on the table again.

Thanks to select NADRA members that have financially supported NADRA representation in the code modification process, I am working alongside other professionals in the Deck Code Coaltion and we are preparing public comments.  We are running this marathon until the end.  I hope you are on the sidelines cheering us on.  Here are the results and comments from the Committee Action Hearings that have us in a runner’s high.  You can view all the Group B ICC documents and the live video from the Group B hearing at this link:  https://www.iccsafe.org/products-and-services/i-codes/code-development/

RB184: Disapproved

Committee Reason:  There were multiple corrections expressed in a modification that the committee felt was too extensive. The wording in Section 507.4 is confusing. The committee urges that the corrections should be brought forward in a public comment. The collaborative effort, and inclusion of engineers in the effort, was a positive aspect for this proposal. (Vote: 10-1)

RB185: Approved As Modified

Committee Reason: The modification to Section R507.10.1.2 removed ‘approved’ because this adjective cannot be applied to manufacture’s instructions. The modification to Section to R507.10.2 reworded the two sentences for clarity. The modification to Section R507.10.4 removes ‘approved’ because this would be confusing to the homeowner. The proposal provided good general prescriptive language for guards that will reduce the need for engineering of guards. The committee had several suggestions for better wording that should come forward in a public comment: Add ‘also’ to Section R312.1.4; ‘design’ instead of ‘construction’ in Section 507.10; revise ‘prevent’ to ‘limit’ in Section R507.10.1.1; joists are part of the deck framing, so the language in Section R507.10.1 is confusing. (Vote: 9-2)

RB186: Approved As Modified

Committee Reason: The modification restores rivets and puts in the term ‘glulam’ to be consistent with the term used in ASTM F1667. Adding the Class D is appropriate for this product. (Vote: 11-0)

RB187: Approved As Submitted

Committee Reason: The committee felt that the overall proposal is a good reorganization that add clarity to the code requirements. Item 3 in Section R507.3.3 is an alternative means that is currently allowed in Chapter 1. (Vote: 11-0)

RB188: Approved As Submitted

Committee Reason: This revision will clarify the engineering option for deck beams where fastened together. (Vote: 11-0)

RB189: Approved As Submitted

Committee Reason: This change clarifies the cantilever limitations. (Vote: 11-0)

RB190: Approved As Submitted

Committee Reason: The proposed footnote allows for a design that does not use the full cantilever, which will allow for a more efficient design. If you do not use this option, the table is more conservative. The commentary should include an example. (Vote: 11-0)

RB191: Approved As Submitted

Committee Reason: The revisions add clarification to the code and allows for better design practice for wood decking. (Vote 11-0)


An Offer from NADRA Members Guild Quality and Best Pick Reports

7.3.19

Dear Fellow NADRA Members,

GuildQuality has some exciting news to share, and we’re seeking your support in helping spread the word!

We are proud to announce that our sister brand, Best Pick Reports, will expand into the greater Seattle area this fall. As a leader in the home services industry for the past twenty years, Best Pick Reports connects contractors with quality-focused customers through a unique model of contractor certification and vetting.

This expansion comes after extensive research into the nation’s top markets, as well as consultation with area contractors and home services professionals. The Puget Sound region needs a new model of lead generation that delivers quality above quantity. Best Pick Reports is poised to fill this gap as we have done in other major metro areas across the country.

With the support of GuildQuality’s tested model of customer research, which is one component of how contractors are vetted and verified, Best Pick Reports will create a hyper-local print and online directory of top-tier home services professionals in King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties. Our goal is to help contractors spend less effort weeding through price shoppers and more time connecting with ready-to-hire homeowners who ultimately become loyal customers.

NADRA members who may be interested to learn more about Best Pick Reports can visit us online at www.bestpickreports.com.  

Home services professionals in King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties are invited to apply for Best Pick Reports certification by contacting James Watson at marketing@bestpickreports.com, by calling (678) 274-6482, or by visiting www.bestpickreports.com/apply/seattle

Thanks for supporting this exciting new chapter of the GuildQuality/Best Pick Reports story.

Sincerely,

The Executive Teams at GuildQuality and Best Pick Reports

MoistureShield Partners with Cardinal Building Products to Distribute Composite Decking & Railing in the Mid-Atlantic Region

ATLANTA, June 18, 2019 – MoistureShield, a division of Oldcastle APG and a manufacturer of innovative composite decking & railing, has partnered with Cardinal Building Products, a leader in building products distribution with vast expertise in decking and alternative exterior products. Headquartered in Leola, PA, Cardinal will carry the full line of MoistureShield state-of-the-art composite products designed to replace traditional decking materials.

A family business since 1992, Cardinal Building Products has close to 1 million sq. ft. of decking at its Leola, PA, facility.  Through the Leola branch location, Cardinal Building Products will supply MoistureShield to lumberyards throughout the Mid-Atlantic Region.

“We have extensive experience in decking and recognize how nicely MoistureShield’s innovative product lines fit into our product selection,” said Rick Hess, General Manager of Cardinal Building Products. “MoistureShield demonstrates the kind of technology our customers are looking for to best meet their customer’s needs and stand out in the decking marketplace.”

The MoistureShield product line features Vision® capped composite decking with a modern, variegated appearance and the exclusive DiamondDefense capped surface. MoistureShield also features its unique CoolDeck technology, for select products, which reduces deck board surface temperatures by up to 35%. Other products include Infuse® decking, a realistic wood-grain finish and ability to withstand total submersion in water; and Vantage®, an uncapped composite with the workability of wood. All MoistureShield decking features the Solid Core Difference™ for advanced strength and moisture resistance. 

“We are excited to partner with Cardinal Building Products to help grow our deck offerings in the Mid-Atlantic,” said Todd Braun, Vice President of Sales for MoistureShield, a division of Oldcastle APG. “Cardinal is strategically positioned to help us continue to expand our offerings in this region, and they have the decking knowledge to help grow the brand.”

MoistureShield composite decking and railing is manufactured from 95 percent recycled content and can be installed directly on the ground, in the ground or under water. The line is backed by an industry-leading warranty against decay, rot and termite damage.  Learn more at www.MoistureShield.com.

About Oldcastle APG

Oldcastle APG, North America’s largest manufacturer of Outdoor Living Products, is part of CRH’s Building Products division. CRH is a leading global diversified building materials group with operating locations in 32 countries worldwide. MoistureShield, a division of Oldcastle APG, proudly manufactures composite deck boards and related products serving a range of retail and distribution customers across North America and several international markets. The development of new technologies and patents has enabled MoistureShield to manufacture superior composite products from recycled wood fiber and recycled polyethylene plastic.

About Cardinal Building Products:

Cardinal Building Products is the premier choice for Mid-Atlantic specialty building product needs. The company has nearly one million square feet of vinyl, composite and polyethylene decking on site, and also offers vinyl and aluminum railing to complete any residential or commercial deck.  They can easily deliver truckloads or skid lots of material to your store or commercial job site. https://www.cardinalbuildingproducts.com