A number of people did blow the lid off FlameDXX. It took a couple years because the 'billion-dollar' clout can go a long way. Even ICC-ES Staff was on board for a couple years, but ICC-ES COMMITTEE finally stuck a fork in it. There's something very important about ICC-ES and any other code report writing agency. They get paid to write reports. No reports, no revenue. Yes, they are a dot.org, but they still have to pay their bills and wages. To turn away a $25K+ report, plus yearly fees, takes a lot of nerve. I'm not saying they are crooked, but they are under a lot of pressure to generate the revenue that pays their salaries.
In a perfect World they are 100% objective, but this isn't a perfect World.
In the case of FLameDXX, had it actually worked, it would have been the Holy Grail of treated wood. Arch/Lonza was struggling to be competitive with Dricon, and the general assumption was that this was their Hail Mary pass (enough religious overtones). I was hearing the same sort of mantra from Arch that I hear in Eco PR's. My ears are ringing from the harmony.
As for how do you trick a Listing agency? It's probably a lot easier than you think, and I'm not going to post the methods here or anywhere. I'm going to sound like I work for UL, and I don't (but know many of them well), but you just don't find these sorts of issues with UL Listings. They are not easy to fool, and can afford to take a pass on a questionable product. UL's mark is bulletproof, and they want to keep it that way. It's pricey for sure, but they are the Cadillac of Listings.
FlameDXX still pops up now and then. About two years ago, I saw a FlameDXX ad in a Canadian builder magazine. It claimed they were now approved by the Calgary Fire Department. Interesting. But when I went to the Calgary FD website to see if they were indeed on the approved list, what I did find was a posted letter from the Calgary FD stating that FlameDXX was not approved. Oops! Sometimes FlameDXX has an off-brand code report and sometimes they don't have one. Sometimes they have a vague Listing, and sometimes they don't. I ran across a few bundles of it at a junk building supply warehouse in MN a month ago. They were selling it at the price of regular OSB. Looked like it had been painted years ago. I learned about it because it was listed on Craig's list of all places. A product that once flew with the biggest of big dogs in the treating industry, and now stacked in a corner at warehouse one step away from the dump. It happens.
Then there's TimberSIL. Lot's of glowing credentials. Problem is, a Oregon State University study says their preservative claims are no good. An F-DOT study says their strength claims are no good. Their Fire claims? Why bother checking at this point? There's already enough evidence that they have been sending sweet samples to the folks doing their qualifying testing.
The 'treating industry' you think is trying to kill Eco is not w/o its demons, too, such as TimberSIL.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
