truckmount girl
1800greenglides
Mr. Braun,
Thank you for taking the time to open a dialog with us and allow us to voice our concerns. The fact that you are willing to listen and communicate will go far to coming to points of common ground and quickly pinpointing areas of this program which need more work.
How much is the fee for having the Space Foundation Seal on a product?
Who specifically is on the TIC, C&M sub-committee & the C&M issues management teams you referred to above?
What will happen if an approved piece of equipment is modified after sale? Say I have a X Brand truckmount which was approved with the X Brand wand, but choose to run it with an RX20 or a different wand?
What about such performance enhancing products as Kunkle/Bayco valves, glides, larger diameter vacuum hoses, etc?
If a machine is tested with a single wand, but is used in the common dual wand configuration, how does that effect the approval status?
How do you assure that a given piece of equipment submitted for testing is truly representative of what is being sold under that name? If an unscrupulous manufacturer wanted to dupe the system they could submit a modified version for testing, but be actually selling something which does not perform as well. This could be done very easily with portable extractors, as a higher performance motor could be installed in literally minutes.
The same idea applies to chemicals. Are you relying upon the honesty of the manufacturer, or are there safeguards in place?
To avoid the possibility of such deception, has CRI considered testing the same equipment in the field, without the manufacturers knowledge? Who is responsible for monitoring such issues long term?
My guess is that if you rented a Rug Doctor from your local supermarket, brought it in and had it tested, you would find significantly different results from unit to unit. how do you intend to address the issues of maintenance and wear? Will someone be conducting random testing to assure proper maintenance?
Will there be other approved testing facilities? If an individual wishes to have their equipment/system tested, but the travel is geographically prohibitive, will they be able to take it to a more local facility?
It seems testing and approval are far more burdensome for small firms and manufacturers in many ways:
Financially (as expressed by a percentage of total annual income)
Time-wise (as expressed by a percentage of man-hours)
Geographically (as expressed by a percentage of miles required to travel)
Will this issue be addressed?
What will happen to the SOA program if the majority of manufacturers of quality cleaning equipment choose not to have their equipment tested?
Who will police disputes arising from this program?
Are you personally concerned that this program may not hold up in court, if a dispute arises, or that it may violate anti-trust laws? Have these possibilities been thoroughly examined by an attorney?
Thanks and take care,
Lisa
Thank you for taking the time to open a dialog with us and allow us to voice our concerns. The fact that you are willing to listen and communicate will go far to coming to points of common ground and quickly pinpointing areas of this program which need more work.
How much is the fee for having the Space Foundation Seal on a product?
Who specifically is on the TIC, C&M sub-committee & the C&M issues management teams you referred to above?
What will happen if an approved piece of equipment is modified after sale? Say I have a X Brand truckmount which was approved with the X Brand wand, but choose to run it with an RX20 or a different wand?
What about such performance enhancing products as Kunkle/Bayco valves, glides, larger diameter vacuum hoses, etc?
If a machine is tested with a single wand, but is used in the common dual wand configuration, how does that effect the approval status?
How do you assure that a given piece of equipment submitted for testing is truly representative of what is being sold under that name? If an unscrupulous manufacturer wanted to dupe the system they could submit a modified version for testing, but be actually selling something which does not perform as well. This could be done very easily with portable extractors, as a higher performance motor could be installed in literally minutes.
The same idea applies to chemicals. Are you relying upon the honesty of the manufacturer, or are there safeguards in place?
To avoid the possibility of such deception, has CRI considered testing the same equipment in the field, without the manufacturers knowledge? Who is responsible for monitoring such issues long term?
My guess is that if you rented a Rug Doctor from your local supermarket, brought it in and had it tested, you would find significantly different results from unit to unit. how do you intend to address the issues of maintenance and wear? Will someone be conducting random testing to assure proper maintenance?
Will there be other approved testing facilities? If an individual wishes to have their equipment/system tested, but the travel is geographically prohibitive, will they be able to take it to a more local facility?
It seems testing and approval are far more burdensome for small firms and manufacturers in many ways:
Financially (as expressed by a percentage of total annual income)
Time-wise (as expressed by a percentage of man-hours)
Geographically (as expressed by a percentage of miles required to travel)
Will this issue be addressed?
What will happen to the SOA program if the majority of manufacturers of quality cleaning equipment choose not to have their equipment tested?
Who will police disputes arising from this program?
Are you personally concerned that this program may not hold up in court, if a dispute arises, or that it may violate anti-trust laws? Have these possibilities been thoroughly examined by an attorney?
Thanks and take care,
Lisa
