What specifically are you referring to?
Does this adress a proof as to “why” this bolt equation with one variable is OK, if so, please state where, and how.
I think you meant to ask the following: Could increasing the load of a deck by installing a hot tub require the installation of more ledger fasteners? A: Yes.
You could inspect houses for 90 years and probably never see a deck without a hot tub and where a hot tub was never present that was built to handle the load from a hot tub other than maybe a 2-person spa.
As I posted before:
A deck must have a very substantial sub-deck built underneath it that is designed or built by someone who knows about structural loading and construction techniques whenever a hot tub or spa is to be installed that is supported by the deck. In other words, the deck ledger should not be holding up the load from a hot tub.
The hot tub should not be **added **into the equation as it has its own support. If it does not then it must be designed by a structural engineer which is way above the normal deck inspection. To add more weight to a ledger with a hot tub unsupported is something you would flag no matter how many bolts you found.
Forget the “equation”, as the document states, it varies with “deck loads”.
A hot tub is one of the worst case deck loads.
You could even possibly have less bolts in the ledger if the deck had another properly built sub-deck built under the tub because now you would have an equivalent smaller deck.
What is your background and why are you reading more into this than needed?