b'Tremco - Strategies and Methods Continued from page 3 Make it clear to aobjective of theI\'ve recently beenyear. The schoolfication. Tremco\'srepresencompetitivelocal contractorit would be tomanufacturerdistrict ingoodtative met with [school othatinformed byfficials] their advantagetobid yourwritingthefaithallowedto express his concerns about the specificationsandnotthespec- throw incontractors thatTremco towriterooting system which would be alternate. Neutralizing them isreams of crite there are literallythe specificationsplacedontheschools.[He] all we can expect."ria for the com for them.Fromex that the ro splainedofingystem Ifor any other propri petition to havethe owner\'s p did not meet theUL790Fire Tremcopages oferetary spec company volunteerstomeet,evenspective the specClassification required by the bid to be the consultant and write thethough many ofspecificationwas to be open,specifications. Notwithstanding spec for free, it is often anythingthe criteriasothatother[Tremco\'s] efforts,theSchool haverequirements that but free.In fact,it canbe quitezerorelevancemanufacturersDistrict has indicated its intention expensive to the owner. It is at thisto assuring theverge on thecou competi to proceed with [awarding to the ld point ofprocess that they areownerau tivelyb thelow bidder]contract. theoftroludicrous becauseidthis able to write their closed specs.b Iroof.project. The tac TremcoIncorporated, which e-free Both the contractor and manufac- ThenTremcothey are so blatanttic Tremco usedserved as supplier for [the 2nd lurer requirements found in these(whoever)to try and hold itsplacedorRoofing Company] undertypes of specifications are gearedstatestothein their eff"closedspecifi stands that aaction could 011civilbe toeliminateanycompetition.owner that theto eliminatecation"dealspursued against the School Disthe Recently,major players haveother manufac witha U. L.firetrict based upon its decision to come up with new and improvedturesystemcompetition.rating.Tremcorisk the safety ofstudents and r\'sits language for the purpose of elim is not equal cit wrote the specifi educators for the sake ofa saving inating competition. I\'ve recentlying criteria written by it, whosecationsU.L. 790 fire rat few dollars bya-requiringpurchasingprodbeen informed by contractors thatprincipal impact is to eliminateingfor thisschool.Theo eruct which does not meet quoted ththere are literally pages of speci competition.manufacturer does not have U.L.specifications. Wethatis realizethfication requirements that vergeSometimes schoolboards or790. What they do have is ASTMstatutoryimposes crim~ provision on the ludicrous because they arepublicmanagers may beE-108. For all practical purposes,inal liability on al d rict businessschoo istso blatant in their effort to elimi duped into thinking the specifica ASTM E-108 and U.L.790 areadministrator who either \'willfuf/y nate compe tions writtenare "open" toidentical and render the identicalneglects or refuses to perform\' tition.really Having the owner allow them toothers. But as Mark Landers, alsofire-ratingprotectiontotheany actChapter 171. required by write the specifications is obvi a governmentcon lawyer,owner. The only difference is thatWhile we do not wish to see any tract ously animportantandfunda stated, "An equal means nothingwhen U.L.runsthis fire test itschooldistrictadministrator mental part of their strategy toif it\'s written around one specifi cal Is itU. L.790.Whenothercharged with aor misdemeanor, lock out competition. It is as notedcation."independent testing agencies runfined the statutory amount or even {later inis article) by Mark Lan It appearsthat onceagainathe same test,referit assentenced tocounty Jailtora ththeyto ders the vice president of Westmanufacturer is attempting to useASTM E-108. The school districtperiodto exceed one year, we not Carrollton school board. "A con its legal club to bullycoerce.recognized this tactic for what itare concerned thatschool disandthe tractor might meet six of sevenThis timeidistrict inwas and the award of the projecttrict\'s actions, if left unchecked, it\'s a school (requirements) but then that\'s notthemetropolitanKansasCitywent to the low bidder, who wascould possibly lead toserious equal."Whichisexactlythearea, on albid April 1not using Tremco.ramifications. . -! ./schoo thatthisinTremco then had its attorney,For example,the school isdisadated June 25, write thetrict willing to shoulder the finan-letter MissouriAtto General. rney Excerpts of thisare as fol ltappears that letter .~lows:specifications providedonce again a by"ThebeDistrictto let manufacturer is ,~,the Schoolthatpriortoattempting to use its ting,requiredthe roofing systemfire rated according Underwriters Laboratories,Inc.legal club to bully 790FireClassification.The ~[competing] roofing system doesandcoerc.e. not have the UL 790 Fire Classi-4'