4specs.com    4specs.com Home Page

Reference Standards Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

4specs Discussion Forum » Specifications Discussions » Reference Standards « Previous Next »

Author Message
(Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
Posted on Thursday, July 21, 2022 - 05:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

If you list a standard in Reference Standards in Part 1, do you have to include an express reference to the standard in the body of the spec?
Rosa Cheney
Senior Member
Username: rdcaia

Post Number: 26
Registered: 07-2018
Posted on Thursday, July 21, 2022 - 06:20 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

In my opinion, Referenced Standards are exactly that...standards that are referenced. In my opinion, referencing them alone (i.e. saying "Referenced Standards" and then listing the standards below that) would not make them a contract requirement unless you specifically state "Comply with these standards..." and at that point are they "referenced" standards anymore or requirements?

I personally believe the list of "Referenced Standards" is a waste of trees (virtual trees for those publishing PDFs).

I do not list "referenced standards" but instead place the standard I want required in the body of the spec where it is applicable, whether under Part 2 Products or Part 3 Execution.
Ronald L. Geren, FCSI Lifetime Member, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSC, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: specman

Post Number: 1615
Registered: 03-2003


Posted on Thursday, July 21, 2022 - 06:50 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

From SectionFormat:

"Reference Standards

"Identify standards referenced elsewhere in the section, complete with designations, dates, and titles. Examples of those are ASTM International
(ASTM), American National Standards Institute (ANSI), Underwriters Laboratory Inc. (UL), Canadian Standards Association International (CSA), and other associations.

"The purpose of this Article is to fully identify standards that are referenced elsewhere using an abbreviated nomenclature. Mere inclusion of a standard in this list does not necessarily require compliance with that standard."
Ron Geren, FCSI Lifetime Member, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSC, SCIP
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg

Post Number: 1481
Registered: 12-2006


Posted on Thursday, July 21, 2022 - 07:44 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Keep in mind that you do not want to imply that the entire Standard is necessarily part of your Contract Document, just the portion that applies.

Often you need to know Grade, Class, Type, etc. to use the Standard in a meaningful way.

BTW, a lot of Standards include content that you specifically do not want in your Contract Documents. Please don't use without knowing what is included and why you need to reference it.
Mark Gilligan SE,
Senior Member
Username: mark_gilligan

Post Number: 976
Registered: 10-2007
Posted on Friday, July 22, 2022 - 12:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

"BTW, a lot of Standards include content that you specifically do not want in your Contract Documents. Please don't use without knowing what is included and why you need to reference it."

This implies that somebody has read the standard. Hopefully they even have a copy of the standard.

Engineers, and I expect others, are focused on the technical provisions and often ignore the non-technical provisions in these reference standards.
Of particular concern Are the Codes of Standard Practice published by organizations such as AISC or the SJI.
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg

Post Number: 1482
Registered: 12-2006


Posted on Friday, July 22, 2022 - 01:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Thanks Mark. I had those in mind when I wrote that.

Folks, keep in mind that most people who write Standards are not Specifiers and even though they might think they are, they are not educated about spec language and the legal ramifications of their content. Well meaning CYA language can hang you.
John Bunzick
Senior Member
Username: bunzick

Post Number: 1884
Registered: 03-2002
Posted on Friday, July 22, 2022 - 02:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

And, to add to what Ken is explaining, reference standards have other uses outside of specifications. Like code, manufacturing, sales, etc.

Per Rosa's comment, I think an article with a separate list is not worth the time, either. Makes more work to edit. Better to spell it out in the paragraph where it is cited.
Guillaume Beaudoin
Junior Member
Username: gbeaudoin

Post Number: 2
Registered: 12-2023
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 10:33 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

MasterFormat offers the section 01 42 00 to name all
Reference Standards. Would it be more advisable to store all Standards in 01 42 00 or to keep them in their individual sections? Asking because we are considering grouping everything in 01 42 00 to make updating to newer versions easier.
Guillaume Beaudoin
Member
Username: gbeaudoin

Post Number: 3
Registered: 12-2023
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 10:36 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

As a complement to my previous post, would it be safe to remove the listing of Reference Standards from each section to just group it all in 01 42 00? Could it create a problem that one section might use the 2015 version of the Standards but another section uses the 2020 version? Asking about Standards that are not cited in any building code, since it has to be that code cited version and not the newest version in that case
Ronald L. Geren, FCSI Distinguished Member, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSC, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: specman

Post Number: 1633
Registered: 03-2003


Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 11:23 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

My SOP is not to list the reference standards at allónot in Division 01 nor in the individual sections. Listing the standards used is a coordination headache, in my opinion.

In Division 01, I only provide a statement about which editions are applicable (those with dates as indicated in the applicable codes and the latest version for those that are not). Within each section, I use a reference standard (without a version date) where it applies and do not list them in a PART 1 references article.
Ron Geren, FCSI Distinguished Member, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSC, SCIP
Brian Payne
Senior Member
Username: brian_payne

Post Number: 314
Registered: 01-2014
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 11:26 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Ron and I are the same wave length. Not to sidetrack the conversation, but I'm seriously considering doing the same for "Reference Sections". Getting tired of the non-essentials.

Sorry edited post because I was brain dead.
Elizabeth Kertesz
Senior Member
Username: ekertesz

Post Number: 9
Registered: 08-2019
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 11:30 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I think it's important to include 01 42 00 "References" in the project manual, at least if you're using MasterSpec. 01 42 00 includes definitions of terms that are not defined in the general terms of the standard AIA contract. i.e. provide, furnish, install, approved, directed, and indicated. It also includes definitions of abbreviations and acronyms for agencies and standards organizations that are used throughout all the other Divisions, and it's better to "say it once" in 01 42 00 rather than risk creating a conflict by duplicating the full name of the organization or standard in other sections. It also says to comply with standards in effect as of date of CDs, unless otherwise indicated, and to comply with dates of standards listed in building codes. So you don't have to call out the date of the referenced standard in other sections - you just need to refer specifically to the part of the standard that applies, and I feel like the MasterSpec guide text does a pretty good job of that.
David R. Combs, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP-a, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: davidc

Post Number: 27
Registered: 02-2015
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 11:35 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Ditto to Ron's post and approach.
David R. Combs, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP-a
Corgan Associates, Inc.
Sr. Specifier, Sr. Associate
Brian Payne
Senior Member
Username: brian_payne

Post Number: 315
Registered: 01-2014
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 11:39 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Agree. I would include Reference Standards specification section for the reasons Elizabeth indicated, just not the actual reference standards.
Elizabeth Kertesz
Senior Member
Username: ekertesz

Post Number: 10
Registered: 08-2019
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 11:42 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I do delete the "Related Requirements" articles, though. Way too difficult to coordinate those, and I doubt that those articles are helpful to the contractor, and probably create a huge liability for the design team because they are pretty much never accurate, and almost always refer to sections that don't actually exist within the project manual. In cases where it seems clear that it would be helpful to tell the contractor where the related requirements are, I refer to those within the applicable paragraph. For example, if I'm doing a LEED project, and I want to specify the manufacturer's recommended adhesive for a flooring material, I'll add language to that paragraph directing the contractor to comply with the low-emitting materials requirements as indicated in Section 01 81 13 "Sustainable Design Requirements."
Ronald L. Geren, FCSI Distinguished Member, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSC, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: specman

Post Number: 1634
Registered: 03-2003


Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 11:44 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Elizabeth: I agree. I didn't mean to suggest removing Section 01 42 00--just not listing the references used throughout the project manual.

Another side note: Remember that Division 01 applies to the entire project manual. Therefore, if you do list the reference standards in Section 01 42 00, you have to list ALL of the reference standards--not just those referenced in your sections.

Can you imagine the pain of searching through your consultants' sections for the reference standards they used? You could ask them for a list, but getting them to do that correctly would be as successful as getting them to follow the format you gave them.
Ron Geren, FCSI Distinguished Member, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSC, SCIP
Alex Sperfeld
Senior Member
Username: alexsperfeldhdrinccom

Post Number: 8
Registered: 11-2022
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 11:49 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

We use 01 42 00 for definitions, terminology, abbreviations, and acronyms commonly used in construction documents. The applicable building codes are listed on the Drawings for each discipline. Each technical section lists the references (codes, standards, etc.) that apply to that section.
I am not a huge fan of the "Related Section" article either, but our software allows us to cross-check for missing/incorrect section references.
Guillaume Beaudoin
Intermediate Member
Username: gbeaudoin

Post Number: 4
Registered: 12-2023
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 01:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Wow, feel honored to have M. Geren give me his answer!

I get the difference between a Standard cited in a building code and a consensual one. Obviously, a code cited Standard implies a specific version, so I agree using a general note to do so works.

But if a consensual Standard is used, not all manufacturers keep their products tested to the newest version, they skip a few. Financial money pit otherwise. I'd be worried my crew doing approval on submitted products might, not knowing better, reject a product that hasn't been tested to the 2024 version of an ASTM.

The vibe I'm getting from Messrs. Geren and Payne is that it's not really an issue.
Elizabeth Kertesz
Senior Member
Username: ekertesz

Post Number: 11
Registered: 08-2019
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 01:22 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Makes sense - good approach. Now I just need to ask the consultants to remove all the "Related Requirements" sections from their specs. Lol. Also, I noticed Mark and Ken had some posts on this thread from 2022 referring to concerns with non-technical provisions of AISC and SJI Codes of Standard Practice - I guess I need to put that on my radar - something I never considered before.
Loretta Sheridan
Senior Member
Username: leshrdn

Post Number: 125
Registered: 11-2021
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 02:12 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I worked with an architect who loved the related requirements article. He also checked to make sure referenced section were included in the project manual AND that the "related items" referenced in those "related requirements" where actually specified.

He was great to work with -- had the drawings ready for me in a timely manner for me to write the specs; he reviewed the project manual in a timely manner for me to incorporate any revisions of corrections he might have. He was a great project manager -- communicating well, setting reasonable deadlines that worked with the milestones and the team, sticking to the deadlines. Communicating well.
Margaret G. Chewning FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: presbspec

Post Number: 364
Registered: 01-2003
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 02:23 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Loretta! Where did you find that architect? Can we clone him?
Loretta Sheridan
Senior Member
Username: leshrdn

Post Number: 126
Registered: 11-2021
Posted on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 - 03:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I know! I wish...

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.
Password:
E-mail:
Options: Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration