Technical Activities Committee Web Letter Ballots
Share |

CLOSED BALLOTS

(Record of original votes as of closing date)

Ballot Title/ID: Preliminary Review of ICRI 320.1R Guide for Selecting Application Methods for the Repair of Concrete Surfaces
Description: TAC has been asked to perform a preliminary review for 320.1R Guide for Selecting Application Methods for the Repair of Concrete Surfaces. We do not have an official policy or mandate to provide preliminary or interim reviews for ICRI documents, but Jim and I think this is fairly straightforward due to the revised preliminary draft being only 8 pages (20150723 320.1R Sample Sections.pdf). This is not the complete document but an example of how the 320 committee is interpreting the direction from the TAC review and they would like to know if they are following the philosophy that we described.

The attached document "icri_3210 1R_To TAC-02_09_2014.pdf" is what was submitted for the initial review. The document "Unofficial 320.1R TAC Review Comments to Committee.pdf" was the TAC response to the review of "icri_3210 1R_To TAC-02_09_2014.pdf" . These documents are provided for your reference.

Please use the attached form "320.1R_review_comment_form.doc" for summarizing your review domments.

ICRI 320.1R was submitted for TAC review in Feb 2014 (copy attached). The review group was P. Hebert, P. Kolf, K. Michols, M. Nelson, L. Sizemore, A. Syed, and J. Weisbarth and they are especially asked to review. Other TAC members are encouraged to participate in the review as well. TAC review comments were provided to Committee 320 in Sep 2014 (copy attached). Page and line numbers for these comments correspond to those in the revised document submitted by Committee 320.

The TAC review group indicated that there was significant repetition in the document between the chapters that must be consolidated wherever possible. For example, surface preparation should be limited to specific references to appropriate documents and relevant sections of Committee 310 with discussion in the 320 guide restricted to the acceptance criteria for a prepared surface required for a given application method. The 320.1R document was difficult to read due to the repetition and excessively lengthy content. ICRI appears to be turning their focus towards educational and networking opportunities and the concept of developing documents that are bullet point and graphic oriented, such as used for presentations seems to be encouraged. The committee was asked to revise the document accordingly.

TAC felt that the document needed significant revision prior to publication, although primary concerns were related to concept, form, and style of writing. Limited technical issues were identified in the review comments. While the document had significant issues, the technical content is valid; therefore, TAC approved the document pending a significant revision and subsequent TAC review following consensus being achieved with the 320 committee.

Committee 320 discussed the TAC review comments In New York and agreed to update the document based on the TAC recommendations. The committee also decided to revise typical sections for selected application methods and submit for preliminary TAC review and feedback prior to revising the overall document. A draft document that includes three revised application methods has been submitted for preliminary TAC review (copy attached) and comment (form attached). At this point, Committee 320 is particularly interested in guidance on format and extent of content for individual application methods to make sure that committee’s efforts are being placed in the right direction. The overall document will then be revised based on TAC feedback for submitted sections and TAC review comments provided to the committee in Sep 2014.

Copies of all attachments are also posted on the TAC Document Draft website “320.1R Repair Application” folder.

Attached File: PLEASE USE Review Comment Form
Ballot Type: Letter Ballot
Start Date: 7/30/2015
End Date: 8/29/2015

 


BALLOT ITEMS

Item # Item Description
1 TAC has been asked to perform a preliminary review for 320.1R Guide for Selecting Application Methods for the Repair of Concrete Surfaces. We do not have an official policy or mandate to provide preliminary or interim reviews for ICRI documents, but Jim and I think this is fairly straightforward due to the revised preliminary draft being only 8 pages (20150723 320.1R Sample Sections.pdf). This is not the complete document but an example of how the 320 committee is interpreting the direction from the TAC review and they would like to know if they are following the philosophy that we described. The attached document "icri_3210 1R_To TAC-02_09_2014.pdf" is what was submitted for the initial review. The document "Unofficial 320.1R TAC Review Comments to Committee.pdf" was the TAC response to the review of "icri_3210 1R_To TAC-02_09_2014.pdf" . These documents are provided for your reference.

Please use the attached form "320.1R_review_comment_form.doc" for summarizing your review domments.

ICRI 320.1R was submitted for TAC review in Feb 2014 (copy attached). The review group was P. Hebert, P. Kolf, K. Michols, M. Nelson, L. Sizemore, A. Syed, and J. Weisbarth and they are especially asked to review. Other TAC members are encouraged to participate in the review as well. TAC review comments were provided to Committee 320 in Sep 2014 (copy attached). Page and line numbers for these comments correspond to those in the revised document submitted by Committee 320.

The TAC review group indicated that there was significant repetition in the document between the chapters that must be consolidated wherever possible. For example, surface preparation should be limited to specific references to appropriate documents and relevant sections of Committee 310 with discussion in the 320 guide restricted to the acceptance criteria for a prepared surface required for a given application method. The 320.1R document was difficult to read due to the repetition and excessively lengthy content. ICRI appears to be turning their focus towards educational and networking opportunities and the concept of developing documents that are bullet point and graphic oriented, such as used for presentations seems to be encouraged. The committee was asked to revise the document accordingly.

TAC felt that the document needed significant revision prior to publication, although primary concerns were related to concept, form, and style of writing. Limited technical issues were identified in the review comments. While the document had significant issues, the technical content is valid; therefore, TAC approved the document pending a significant revision and subsequent TAC review following consensus being achieved with the 320 committee.

Committee 320 discussed the TAC review comments In New York and agreed to update the document based on the TAC recommendations. The committee also decided to revise typical sections for selected application methods and submit for preliminary TAC review and feedback prior to revising the overall document. A draft document that includes three revised application methods has been submitted for preliminary TAC review (copy attached) and comment (form attached). At this point, Committee 320 is particularly interested in guidance on format and extent of content for individual application methods to make sure that committee’s efforts are being placed in the right direction. The overall document will then be revised based on TAC feedback for submitted sections and TAC review comments provided to the committee in Sep 2014.

Copies of all attachments are also posted on the TAC Document Draft website “320.1R Repair Application” folder.

Attached File: For Review 320.1R Sample Sections

 

Download all ballot description + item description files as zip file

VOTING MEMBERS:

 

Item # Member Aff. Aff. w/
Editorial
Com.
Neg. Abs. Not
Retd.
Comments Attached
Files
1 *Aamer Syed     X    
Fred Goodwin   X     I feel the draft is acceptable and in the right philosophy. Good work to the committee.  
Gabriel Jimenez   X  
James McDonald   X   Comment
John Weisbarth   X     Comment
Karl Rickert     X    
Kevin Michols   X  
Lee Sizemore   X   Yes these sections are exactly what I would expect for the updated document. My opinion is that the committee is on the right track.
Mark Nelson   X   M Nelson comment 320.1
Monica Rourke     X    
Peter DeNicola     X    
Peter Kolf   X Per P. Kolf 8/10/2015 entered administrative vote as abstaining by FG

FYI: I won’t be sending comments on these 320.1 sample sections since I am the primary author of them.
 
Pierre Hebert   X   Comment

 

PRELIMINARY VOTING SUMMARY:

There are 14 committee members eligible to vote.

Passage of an item requires resolution of any negative votes. Passage of an item requires that at least 1/2 of all voting members on the committee roster must cast an affirmative vote. Also, the number of affirmative votes must be at least 2/3 of the yes and no votes cast. Please contact ICRI headquarters for additional information on balloting procedures.

Item # Affirmative Affirmative with Editorial Comments Negative Abstain Not Returned The 1/2 Rule The 2/3 Rule
1   6   2 5 Item Meets Item Meets

Back to Technical Activities Committee Web Letter Ballots page

Thank You, Supporting Members!

International Concrete Repair Institute

1000 Westgate Drive, Suite 252 | St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 USA | Phone: +1 651-366-6095

©2016 International Concrete Repair Institute, Inc.

Privacy Policy