The Association for Challenge Course Technology (ACCT) has released a draft standard with proposed changes to the ANSI/ACCT Standard 03-2019. The draft, which includes significant changes to the current standard, is now open for public comment through Jan. 9.
At some point, and possibly soon, some variation on the draft standard will be enacted, with real impacts on operators, builders, inspectors, and designers. However, anyone and everyone (it is not necessary to be an ACCT member) can have input on the draft during the public comment period and influence the final standard.
Notably, some proposed changes will affect many, if not most, zip lines that involve hand braking. That makes it essential for operators of hand braking tours to review the draft and provide comment on it. Adventure Park Insider’s Rick Kahl has written an online exclusive article addressing the proposed changes to the hand braking standards.
Other sections with a substantial number of changes include the design, installation, and testing of guy anchors; critical rope systems; and lanyards. These changes could touch most aerial adventure parks and experiential education programs with aerial elements.
At the very least, operators should contact their builders and inspectors to discuss possible impacts. To shape the standard itself, operators (and others) should review the draft and submit comments.
There is a structured format for submitting comments and possible changes; the draft and the comment forms are available from ACCT at acctinfo.org.
For example, the comment form notes, “If leaving comments/proposed language changes, please submit once per numbered standard, do not combine multiple comments into one submission.”
The commenting form, in other words, treats each separate subsection of the draft as a distinct standard. “What we would like is for people to submit one form per specific standard within the ACCT 02-202X Draft Standard document that they want to comment on,” John Lazarus, chair of the ACCT Consensus Group, told API.
For example, comment on standard B.2.4 would be on one form submission. Comment on standard D.4.2.1 would be on another form submission. D.4.3 would be another form submission, etc.
The reason for this format, Lazarus said, is that “combining comments on multiple different standards in one form submission would create problems with our system that organizes the comments.”
Further, for proposed changes to the draft standard, the comment guidelines ask for:
- the chapter and standard number (i.e., B.2.4);
- line number(s) in the revision that the language appears on (each line of the draft is numbered);
- the original language in the revision;
- reason or rationale for the proposed changes;
- and (most importantly) the proposed changes.
For further information or answers to your questions, contact ACCT office manager John Voegtlin at [email protected].
