And I thought interpreting this stuff was confusing. Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT 860-535-2080 www.fpdc.com
> On Sep 18, 2014, at 11:53 AM, Roland Huggins <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Good overall summary but for the procedural fanatics among us, there are a > few additional steps within the process. Not all submitted NITMAMs go to the > floor. Each are reviewed by the Standards Council for compliance such as if > only a public input was submitted but no comment then a related NITMAM would > be rejected. It use to be one could be submitted with only partial > involvement. When accepted for presentation to the technical session, it > becomes a CAM (certified amending motion). If the submitter of the CAM is > not present (or their assigned representative) OR they do not stand-up to > submit it when called (as happens following previous thrashings on related > CAMs), then it is not discussed / processed. If the CAM is rejected (or it > passes but fails the follow-up vote by the technical committee) there is the > opportunity to appeal to the Standards Council (which often happens) but it > is extremely rare for them to overturn the process. > > > Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering > American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives > Dallas, TX > http://www.firesprinkler.org > > > > > >> On Sep 17, 2014, at 12:11 PM, Steve Leyton <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> The term NITMAM is an acronym meaning, Notice of Intent to Make a Motion. >> After 2nd Draft (Formerly ROC), a final draft of any standard is published >> for one last round of public review. Since there is no opportunity to make >> comments for committee consideration, the last act of objection is to >> challenge a comment on the floor of the code hearing when the standard is up >> for adoption by general vote. In order to raise your objection and be on >> the docket, you have to file a NITMAM to be heard on the floor. After >> debate (often argument) the motion is put up for vote. If it fails, the >> committee's revision stands in the final version but if it's upheld, then >> the language of the section being challenged reverts back to the previous >> edition and the committee's efforts on that item are vaporized. >> >> SML > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
