so, would you trust these sections?

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

Author Message Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 1173 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Monday, July 11, 2011 - 04:24 pm:    Last I looked, the calendar said that it was 2011. I was just reviewing a set of Mechanical and Electrical sections for a very large public project, and at least half the sections have that old paragraph requiring that "All systems shall be Y2K compliant". I decided to review the contents a little more closely.... J. Peter Jordan (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Monday, July 11, 2011 - 05:00 pm:    About 5 years ago, we were looking at some MEP sections to update them and could not find the color references in current manufacturer's literature. It took finding someone who had a 10-year-old color selection kit to get the right colors to make current selections. Was this really an indication of the last time that their specs had be updated? Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 281 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 - 05:01 am:    A University client that we often work with, always ranked in the top 5 for the US, insists that you verify in writing that you conform to their master specifications. The average "last revision" date on the footer of each Section is 1999. J. Peter Jordan (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 - 10:52 am:    OK; so their paint specifications don't comply with current VOC requirements (if you can get the products they call out). I guess that I would suggest that the A/E get indemnification, in writing, for any problems arising out of using obsolete documents. Mark Gilligan SE, Senior Member Username: mark_gilligan Post Number: 404 Registered: 10-2007 Posted on Tuesday, July 12, 2011 - 05:12 pm:    Ten years is nothing. I found a Civil Engineer's cast-in-place concrete section that referenced standards at least 20 years old. Many engineers are not familiar with the contents of their specification sections and they definately do not formally update them with the adoption of the new codes. Regarding the University that requires compliance with master specifications at least 12 years old, I would suggesting that you state that you cannot comply with this requirement since it conflicts with the requirement to comply with the current building regulations. Suggest requesting a fee to formally review their master specifications for compliance with the current codes. This may be greater than your total design fee for the project. Steve Taylor Senior Member Username: steveatwi Post Number: 41 Registered: 07-2008 Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 - 01:17 pm:    Zombie specs: I've commented here before about the specifications I see listing "acceptable manufacturers" who have been dead for at least 25 years. It is hard to take the rest of the spec seriously. Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 504 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 - 02:06 pm:    If only manufacturers would make as much commotion when they discontinue a product as when they introduce one. Or when they go out of business... Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEEDŽ AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 1276 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, July 13, 2011 - 03:01 pm:    Sky rockets in flight? Or at least "so long and thanks for all the fish"...