EPDs for Misc. Metal Fabrications in the United States
Planning a 2026 push into specs for steel accessories, connectors, and fabricated metal assemblies? Here is the definitive, numbers‑first snapshot of the U.S. “miscellaneous metals” EPD landscape so you can pick the right rulebook, program operator, and timing. We analyze who is publishing, which PCRs dominate, where expiries cluster, and how service providers factor into speed and quality.
What counts as “miscellaneous metals” in practice
Think steel fabrications that live between main structure and finishes. Structural connectors, buckling restrained braces, rebar couplers, embeds, and post‑tension accessories often sit here. Searchers also use terms like metal fabricators, fabricated steel accessories, architectural metalwork, and miscellaneous metals.
The five‑year snapshot at a glance
Across the last five calendar years, the U.S. category shows 14 currently valid product‑specific EPDs from 4 manufacturers and 4 program operators. The freshest addition is CoreBrace LLC’s Buckling Restrained Braces issued on Jul 17, 2025 with SCS Global Services under ISO 21930, valid through Jul 16, 2030.
EPDs issued per year
| Year | EPDs |
|---|---|
| 2021 | 1 |
| 2022 | 0 |
| 2023 | 0 |
| 2024 | 8 |
| 2025 | 5 |
The market clearly heated up in 2024, then sustained momentum in 2025. If you are entering now, you join an active but still under‑served field.
Who is publishing the most
Four manufacturers account for all current declarations.
- MiTek Inc. leads with 8 EPDs. This signals a broad connector portfolio strategy that treats EPDs as a spec‑enabler rather than a one‑off.
- Re‑Steel follows with 4 EPDs, then CoreBrace LLC and Suncoast Post‑Tension with 1 each.
Concentration creates an opening. If you compete with any of these firms, a targeted first wave of EPDs can win you more shortlist appearances in bids that require verified data.
Want the latest EPD news?
Follow us on LinkedIn to get relevant updates for your industry.
Program operators buyers actually use
Program operator choice matters for speed and reviewer expectations. The current split shows both concentration and diversity across manufacturers.
- EPD Hub accounts for 10 EPDs across 2 manufacturers. That makes it the most common home in this category.
- SCS Global Services accounts for 2 EPDs across 2 manufacturers. This suggests cross‑manufacturer trust in their process.
- ASTM International and EPD International AB each appear once.
High count at one operator can mean faster peer references and familiar formats for specifiers. Diversity across multiple operators indicates buyers accept several publication routes in this category.
The PCR rulebooks that actually get used
Pick the wrong Product Category Rule and comparability suffers. Here is what competitors chose and when these references time out.
PCRs used and latest expiry
| PCR | EPDs | Latest expiry |
|---|---|---|
| EPD International PCR for Construction Products 2019:14 (EN 15804:A2:2019/AC:2021) v1.3.4 | 7 | Feb 7, 2030 |
| Corrosion protection of fabricated steel products | 3 | Dec 21, 2029 |
| Part B: Designated Steel Construction Products | 2 | Jan 7, 2029 |
| PCR 2019:14 Construction products (EN 15804+A2) (1.3.3) | 1 | Jul 9, 2029 |
| ISO 21930:2017. Sustainability in buildings and civil engineering works | 1 | Jul 16, 2030 |
Two playbooks dominate. EN 15804‑based PCRs through EPD International are common, and a corrosion‑protection specific PCR covers a meaningful slice of fabricated steel. If your products align with those scopes, aligning to the same rulebook improves apples‑to‑apples comparisons in submittals.
Renewal timing and the expiry wave you should plan for
Upcoming expiries cluster in two windows. One declaration hits in 2026 on Feb 28. A larger bulge arrives in 2029 with 8 expiries, followed by 5 more in 2030. Manufacturers in these groups should plan data refresh and reviewer time well ahead of those dates to avoid lapses in submittal readiness. Treat it like a major outage window on your plant calendar.
How often teams use an EPD service provider
Four of the 14 EPDs were prepared with the help of a third‑party EPD consultant or service provider, roughly 29 percent of the set. For context, service providers like Parq combine software with white‑glove data collection so your engineers spend more time building and less time hunting utility invoices. That edge is often the difference between a submittal that lands in two quarters versus next year.
The latest exemplar to study
CoreBrace LLC’s Buckling Restrained Braces is the most recent U.S. entry we see, issued Jul 17, 2025 by SCS Global Services under ISO 21930 and valid to Jul 16, 2030. For seismic bracing and lateral systems, this signals rising transparency in performance‑critical components. Competitors in adjacent bracing and connection systems can mirror this path with similar scope and modules.
Notably absent names buyers may search
Two sizable brands that many specifiers associate with connectors and accessories appear absent in this category view as of Jan 23, 2026, at least in the public registry most teams check. Simpson Strong‑Tie did not show current U.S. EPDs under metals during our check. Dayton Superior likewise did not appear in this category. Both may publish under different product families or with EPDs not yet visible in this slice. On the other hand, Hilti and nVent show current metals EPDs in adjacent scopes, which signals movement among multi‑category players.
If you are one of these manufacturers reading this, there is clear room to shape the narrative in specs. A focused first batch covering your volume drivers can unlock project pathways that currently favor competitors with verifiable declarations.
Practical play for product teams in 2026
- Map your top ten SKUs against the PCRs above. If your hero products are galvanized or otherwise surface‑treated, the corrosion‑protection PCR often fits. If your products are diverse, EN 15804‑based construction product PCRs offer usable breadth.
- Pick a program operator your customers recognize and your team can move through quickly. The market accepts multiple operators here, so optimize for reviewer throughput and template familiarity.
- Slot renewal timing into your commercial calendar. The 2029 to 2030 window will be crowded. Start data collection early so you are not queued behind peers. Delays here risk late‑stage substitution on jobs with carbon accounting.
- Decide whether to partner with an EPD service provider. The becomming standard for competitive categories is to outsource the heavy lift once and then keep data maintenance humming each year.
One final note and how to get the raw data
This article is based on the global public registry of EPDs that most architects and specifiers use. Due to loading delays, some declarations from the last half of 2025 may not be reflected yet. If you want the full, up‑to‑date dataset behind this analysis or a second opinion on which PCR best fits your next declaration, connect with me on LinkedIn and send a message. I am happy to share the underlying tables and hop on a quick call at no cost to help you pressure‑test options.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which program operator appears most in this category in the U.S. over the last five years?
EPD Hub appears most often with 10 EPDs across 2 manufacturers, followed by SCS Global Services with 2, and then single entries for ASTM International and EPD International AB.
What are the most commonly used PCRs for miscellaneous metal fabrications and when do they expire?
The most common is EPD International 2019:14 (EN 15804 A2) with latest expiry on Feb 7, 2030, followed by Corrosion protection of fabricated steel products with latest expiry on Dec 21, 2029. Others include Part B: Designated Steel Construction Products (latest Jan 7, 2029), PCR 2019:14 Construction products (1.3.3) (latest Jul 9, 2029), and ISO 21930:2017 used for a recent brace EPD expiring Jul 16, 2030.
When should a manufacturer start an EPD renewal to avoid a gap?
Plan data collection and verification well ahead of public expiry clusters in 2029 and 2030. Many teams begin scoping 6 to 9 months before verification to keep submittals uninterrupted.
How often do teams in this category use outside EPD consultants or service providers?
About 29% of current EPDs in this set were prepared with a third‑party EPD consultant or service provider. That share suggests outside help is common when teams want speed and minimal internal disruption.
About the Author
With a passion for sustainability and a love for complex data, Toby helps manufacturers efficiently collect data from across their organization and get their EPDs done right. He’s especially interested in how AI can support human expertise, helping R&D and factory teams work faster, smarter, and with less friction.
