A proposal to reference 2 AAMA standards, AAMA 711 and AAMA 715, in the 2015 IBC was disapproved yesterday.
From what I have been able to determine, at least part of the reason was due to confusion on the part of at least one committee member with regards to what the requirements are for standards referenced in the International Codes.
A representative of the EIFS industry opposed one of the standards. She indicated that her industry had been unaware of the development of the standard, and that therefore its development was not consistent with ICC’s requirement that referenced standards be developed in an open and consensus manner.
In actuality, 5 members of the EIFS Manufacturers Association (EIMA) participated in the balloting of the standard in question (AAMA 714). So it would appear that her claim that the standard was not developed in an open manner was incorrect.
But the disapproval of AAMA 711 and AAMA 714 was only partly due to this partys claim that the standard was not developed in an open manner. The other factor was that at least one of the committee members thought the ICC required all standards referenced in its codes to either be developed through ASTM, or approved by ANSI.
In actuality, ICC Council Policy #28 requires standards to be developed through an open and consensus process SUCH AS ASTM or ANSI. It does not specifically require standards to either be ASTM or ANSI approved.
The more difficult question to answer is “Just what constitutes an ‘open and consensus’ process?”
The best answer is to look at the intent. The intent is to permit all interested parties the ability to participate in the development of the standard, and to have their opinions heard.
The process used by AAMA is an “open and consensus process”. We will need to revisit that with the ICC through Public Comment on AAMA 711 and AAMA 714.