It seems that every year shortly before the AASHTO Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures annual meeting, one of the competitive trade groups of the corrugated polyethylene pipe industry distributes some form of an "attack" piece. The purpose of these documents appears to us as an effort to mislead AASHTO. This year's "entry" comes courtesy of the American Concrete Pipe Association. It is titled "HDPE Pipe Material Requirements - Moving Forward?" In our opinion, it is significantly erroneous. At issue is the recommation of NCHRP 429.
In an effort to try and correct what we see as blatant misrepresentations on the part of the ACPA, we have reproduced their published article with our views on a number of their statements. If you would like to investigate this further, please your local ADS sales representative at 800-821-6710 to provide you with any additional information you may require.
In our opinion, two of the most irresponsible misrepresentations on the part of the ACPA are:
· "CPPA Contests NCHRP 429 Recommations"
The fact of the matter is that CPPA (through the auspices of the Plastic Pipe Institute) has recommed accepting the findings of the NCHRP report.
· "CPPA Hinders the Development of a QA/QC Test"
In actuality, CPPA and nine of the largest polyethylene resin manufacturers in the world have joined together through the Plastic Pipe Institute to develop a more reliable QA/QC test protocol than available under the protocol established under NCHRP 429. Since the release of the NCHRP report in March 1999, this task force along with the principle investigator of the original report, Dr. Grace Hsuan, have been working diligently to ensure development of a more reliable standard. This standard is currently being balloted through ASTM.
It is truly unfortunate that we must deal with another industry's efforts to mislead you. We hope you find the attached information helpful. We urge you to invest the time to read our responses to the misleading comments of the ACPA.
We are also attaching a copy of an advertising reprint ADS placed in "Civil Engineering" magazine as a rebuttal to earlier tactics the ACPA employed. It in you will discover their tactics are historic when compared to other industries faced with a new paradigm. We encourage you to read it the next time a representative from the ACPA begins discussing the shortcomings and dangers of our products and our industry.
Once again, I would welcome the opportunity to answer any questions you may have regarding the attached document.
James B. Goddard
Comments or questions about this letter should be directed email@example.com