ALOA ICRL common mistakes
ALOA ICRL · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Ordering a lockset or exit device by guessing the door handing from the corridor side without confirming hinge side, bevel, and swing.
Handing is treated as a visual detail rather than a ordered hardware attribute, and the candidate forgets that handing is determined from a defined side of the door.
What to do instead
Use a standard handing chart, confirm hinge side and bevel from the secure or specified reference side, and record handing in the hardware schedule before ordering.
Selecting a door closer by door width alone and ignoring door height, exposure, latch force, backcheck, and accessible opening-force limits.
Catalog headings emphasize width sizing, so candidates stop at the first matching column and do not verify the full closing cycle.
What to do instead
Size the closer using the manufacturer's width and height charts, verify spring power and adjustments, and check opening force, closing speed, latching speed, and backcheck against the application.
Building a master key system by assigning cuts level by level without a written progression or key-interchange test.
The candidate focuses on making the master key work and does not check whether unintended keys operate other cylinders.
What to do instead
Prepare a documented progression chart, define levels and keyways, test every change key and master key against all cylinders, and retain the bitting and pinning records.
Issuing master, grand master, or control keys without signed authorization, a receipt, or an audit trail.
Key control is often treated as a locksmith task rather than a facility security program, and convenience overrides documentation.
What to do instead
Adopt a written key-control policy with authorization levels, signed receipts, restricted keyways, periodic audits, and documented key recovery or rekeying procedures.
Applying a fail-secure electrified lock to an egress door without a listed mechanical release or other code-compliant means of free egress.
The candidate confuses fail-secure with secure and fail-safe with unsafe, and does not trace the power-loss and fire-alarm states.
What to do instead
Define the required state on power loss and fire alarm, use fail-safe locking where electric locking could impede egress, and coordinate any release device with the life-safety sequence and authority having jurisdiction.
Specifying an electric strike or exit device without verifying voltage, current draw, power transfer, request-to-exit, and fire-alarm release coordination.
Electrified hardware is chosen from a catalog feature list rather than from a complete sequence of operation and power budget.
What to do instead
Prepare a sequence of operation, calculate voltage drop and power supply capacity, confirm the power transfer method, and coordinate REX, fire alarm, and door position monitoring on the submittal.
Adding electrified hardware to a fire-rated door assembly without confirming that the assembly and components remain listed for the application.
The candidate treats fire rating as a door-leaf label only and overlooks the effect of strikes, exit devices, closers, and field modifications on the assembly.
What to do instead
Verify the fire door assembly listing, use listed components for the door type, avoid unauthorized field modifications, and require fire-door inspection and labeling documentation.
Using panic hardware on a fire-rated door where fire exit hardware is required, or assuming the terms are interchangeable.
Both devices look similar and both provide egress, so the candidate misses the fire-label distinction.
What to do instead
Specify fire exit hardware for fire-rated doors, confirm the label and listing, and use panic hardware only where the code requires panic protection without a fire-rating requirement.
Checking accessible clear width at the frame opening or hinge side instead of measuring the clear opening with the door open to 90 degrees.
The candidate measures the rough opening because it is easy to access and forgets that the door leaf, stop, and hardware reduce the usable clear width.
What to do instead
Measure the actual clear opening at the narrowest point with the door open 90 degrees, verify the required clear width, and check closer force and operable hardware requirements.
Choosing hardware from a manufacturer catalog without first determining occupancy, fire rating, egress requirements, and project specification.
Catalog selection is faster than code analysis, so the candidate starts with products and later tries to justify them.
What to do instead
Perform a code and occupancy analysis first, establish the door schedule and specification requirements, then select listed hardware that satisfies egress, fire, accessibility, and security needs.