•  A Uniform Evaluation Report provides condensed information: A quick review of the UER briefs the code official for upcoming discussions before they happen. This allows a great exchange of ideas between the building professionals and the jurisdiction.
•  A Uniform Evaluation Report provides convenience: The code official only has to look in one place to find all relevant test data summarized. Unlike a listing, a Uniform Evaluation Report addresses all the requirements for code acceptance, even in different codes or standards.  
• Uniform Evaluation Report allows leveraging of resources: Let us assume that each Evaluation Report has about one week of engineering hours. Imagine if your staff had to spend 40 or more hours reviewing test reports on each innovative product. Some years might see 300 new products introduced to the market place. Each department would require 10 fold employees to do the work.  Evaluating just 100 new products, at 40 hours each, requires almost two additional employees at a cost of perhaps $100,000. It could be argued that each department using Uniform Evaluation Service frees two staff members to do other important work. Using UES can enhance a customer’s counter experience and satisfaction.
•  Provides a tool to simplify permit issuance
•  The Uniform Evaluation Service strives for excellent customer service. Give us a call and we are confident you will be pleased.

True, the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials is the parent organization of the Uniform Evaluation Service who issues Uniform Evaluation Reports. Plumbers, yes, but we are also much more.  Remember that IAPMO also issues the Uniform Mechanical Code. As a code official, you often rely on your mechanical inspector to look over all the systems the other inspectors won’t do —- for instance, grease hood duct systems, and shafts and dampers. Shafts and dampers are integral to the safe operation of all buildings required to maintain specific floor-to-floor fire separation. Floor-to-floor fire separation allows the existing concepts to function, protects life and property. With this much responsibility, expanding into the building component arena is a natural fit for IAPMO. Industry asked us to enter the building component arena about five years ago to provide an option to the industry stakeholders.

• 75 years of product certification
• 85 years of code development
• Trusted by code officials, architects, engineers

• Referenced code requirements and or acceptance criteria
• Technical data evaluation
• QA system evaluation
• Use of recognized laboratories

• Prepared by registered design professionals or recognized laboratories
• Reviewed by registered design professionals
• Comments resolved
• Recommendation to staff/committee
• ES Technical Director review and recommendation to committee
• Technical committee approves
• Annual re-examination

• Initial audit
• Surveillance audits
• Continuous compliance
• Ensures consistency of production

• ISO/IEC 17025-ILAC-R&T recognition
• Test equipment
• Calibrations practices
• Staff qualifications
• Documentation
• Record keeping
• Reporting practices
•  Ensures quality test reports

Here is a quick tabulation of current qualification (Equivalent qualifications)

Lately some have been making a fuss about 2015 IBC Section 1703. The following is a summary of the code requirements and how IAPMO’s Uniform ES satisfies them: 

1703.1.1 Independence - Requires: 

• objective, competent and independent
• disclose possible conflicts of interest

IAPMO qualifies because it is objective, competent and independent. Further, conflicts of interests are disclosed

1703.1.2 Equipment:

Equipment Adequate and Calibrated

IAPMO qualifies because it actually has an in-house ISO 17025 certified test lab. To be used as substantiating data, third party labs must also be ISO 17025 certified.

Here is SEAOC’s opinion

SEAOC 2011 CONVENTION PROCEEDINGS
 Title:  An Evaluation of Current Practices Related to the Development and Implementation of Acceptance Criteria and Product Evaluation Reports (Mark A. Moore, Chair; SEAOC Evaluation Reports Committee)

Page 1:  “…. Furthermore, while ICC-ES and IAPMO ES are the prominent ER Providers, there are several other organizations that provide reports.

Evaluation Criteria

• Will use existing criteria where possible — avoid costs associated with re-inventing the wheel
• Evaluation Criteria for Public Comment — allow public input to reach a good solution
• Policy and Procedures — Discuss the criteria meeting how it works. Comments collected. Use the SOP

Minimum QA Requirements

•  Show the inspection list — we don’t require you to give us a copy of your quality manual.

Complaint Procedure — exists should you need one.

• Assures
  • Performance
  • Consistency
  • Reusable Specification
  • Level Playing Field for Growth

Plan Review Services also available for Building Departments

• Use noted experts to review plans and provide solutions — when your staff is too busy we can help with the overload