b'etter stot heEdi t or In Defense ofaddress the remaining reasons inDick Fricklas, E lewood, Colo. Ignorance?ngtheMRCAMay1 ODickck/as recently retired document.FriEditor\'sNote:Theopinionsforobjecting cites "there isIncreased cost is mentioned,from RIEi a holds the title of MRCAabutnd expressed in this and all Mid great likelihood that the s cifyingif all contractorsrequired to betechnical director emeritus.In pe are west Rooter articles are those ofcommunity will routinely incorpo accredited, then all bidders haveaddition to the Mccawley Award, the authorsdo not reflectrateproposed standard . onthesameoverhead factor, andFrick/as received the J.A.Piper andthe those of the MRCAmerely bynon insured buildings."pricesshouldreflectthis. TheAward from NRCA this year. and -FMRC tact of.Well, yes, one could certainlyexclusion of the nonaccredited,ASTM\'s Walter C.Voss Award in publicationMRCA welcomes articles andsee that- but don\'t they do thatine low bidder will benefit the1991. He is a c editor ptontributing letters to the editor for publica already, alongULcodequalified MRCA contractor, as bidtor RSI and The Roofing Specifier withand tion in the Midwest Roofer onrequirem s? Don\'t your mem prices will m accurately r lectmagazines, and apubent oreef frequently this and other matters of bers bidwork th is to meetthecosts of the project.lishedwriter. Frick/as impor onattruefree-lance tanceto roofingcontractors.FMClass 1,eventhou theOther reasons cited pertain tois co-author (with Bill Griffin) of gh MRCAreservestherighttobuilding will not be FM insured?record k ng and to field audits.the Manual of Low S R f eepi lopeooinclude letters to the editor atThist r son goes on inIsis different from today? Don\'tSystems (McGraw-Hill, 1996). He firs ea part:thMRCA\'s discretion.All lettersthe proposed standard could resultyouseem consultantsandcanbereachedathise-mail ore may be subject to editing that isin an ina shift in designinspectors than ever before? If aaddress: rutas96@aol.com ppropriate notintendedtochange theliability .roofing contractors.contractor has nothing to hide, the to 8) author\'s message.Well yes, but every time you bidinspections actually are to your(Quiz appears on page on,pick up that liabilitybenefit, by verifyingthatyour work you The Midwest Roofing Contractorsanyway.Ifyoufaitoa forapplication was acceptable.n IskWheAssociation has a ys led the e changes when youa,you bid guaranteed work, don\'t lwa ntireseedefectroofing community in its q st foraren\'t younegligent if youjustthese p ects get inspected by ue rojin-depth, honestignore it? If deck welds are inade the manufacturer? D \'t we deal information.onhaveenyouryou Ibe usingexcellentquate, dojust go ahead andwithOSHA,EPA,andDOT documents datingback to"Tenroof over it?-ofinspectorsthatknowfarless course not. Y rsRoofing Research"theSo, whyunified resistance? Iabout our business every day? ea ofallthe way to current d e eh emembers don\'t be eWithallthisscrutiny,why ocum nts from th op yourlievT & Rittee andtechni that ignorance is a(Justwouldn\'ta comm yourdefense.you welcomecompecal adviser, Rene Dupuis.for,attaching aiz forrtent inspector whohas had to fun I\'mqu you also aveandsuspecI amproud to h played amembers on FMRC,Ittake FM\'s accreditation training. very m or role in the develop that mostyournecan(Perhapsthis qualificationof in offi members ment of MRCA\'s highly-regardeddo ajob of answeringinspectors would be the reasonablebiggest CERTA program, which I recom the questions. Ibet that nonebenefit in the wholeAWord: alsoprogram.)Final mend to anyone who asks.of the members will get a Back1 , Ih by 100 per in991 wasonored Itherefore astonished to readcent grade. In fact, I\'msure IMRCA with the presentation ofFM has an e lent article on amnotcanthexcel 100 about MRCA\'s organized opposi get apercent grade!)-andJamesQ.Mccawley award. I felttheirproposedprogramthat tion to the FMRC Accreditation p that\'spoint. Compliance w hthat this a wasrIappeared in Volume 15,bro myit wardfo whatrep num er gram. I h no d that most ofFM requirements gets more com resented, not me personally. And1, of Approval P News.I aveoubtroduct your members welcomed the NRCAplicated every year. Ifmem that is-ining the educa recommend that copies be proMRCAaddressAccreditation program when it wasber contractors bid just one FMRCtional and technological needs ofvidedall of MRCA\'s members to andyea is in development,also suspectinsured job ar, they need th our roofingcommunity.MRCAin order to gain a better underyo aveen those ofur members that applyeducation.TheaccreditationandI h always be onthestandingofwhat\'sintended. spray-in-place polyurethane foamprocess is justa education onsame wavelengthonand IMeanwhile, thank you for gth t,this,iving have joined SPFD\'stionhow to u FM\'s eng ringencourage your members to beme aa to voice my opinion, accredita seinee datach nce program as well.to m theirirements. How ismore receptive on this FM. Iand much success for the future. eetrequ issueReferringto MRCA May10this different from GERTA?think that they will find much inDick Fricklas \'s to news release, the first reason citedBefore I goto the quiz, let\'sthe programtheir benefit. 4'