FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION
BOARD MEETING
OF THE
FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION
PLENARY SESSION MINUTES
August 21, 2007
PENDING APPROVAL
The meeting of the Florida Building Commission was called to order by Chairman Raul Rodriguez at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 21, 2007, at the Embassy Suites Hotel, Tampa, Florida.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
Raul L. Rodriguez, AIA, Chairman
Nicholas D’Andrea, Vice Chairman
Richard Browdy
Christ Sanidas*
James Goodloe
George Wiggins
Herminio Gonzalez
Hamid Bahadori
Randall J. Vann
William Norkunas
Dale Greiner
Jeffrey Gross
Paul D. Kidwell
Joseph “Ed” Carson
Jon Hamrick
Chris Schulte
Do Y. Kim
Steven C. Bassett
Nanette Dean
Michael McCombs
George Wiggins
Craig Parrino, Adjunct Member
Doug Murdock, Adjunct Member
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
Peter Tagliarini
Gary Griffin
OTHERS PRESENT:
Rick Dixon, FBC Executive Director
Ila Jones, DCA Prog. Administrator
Jim Richmond, DCA Legal Advisor
Jeff Blair, FCRC
Mo Madani, Technical Svcs. Manager
WELCOME
Chairman Rodriguez welcomed the Commission and gallery to the August 2007 plenary session of the Florida Building Commission. He thanked both TAC members and staff for an excellent job reviewing proposed amendments for the 2007 update of the Florida Building Code and adding their recommendations.
He directed the Commission to Mr. Blair for a review of the Commission meeting agenda. Chairman Rodriguez thanked Joe Bigelow, Bruce Ketchum, Mo Madani, Ann Stanton, and Betty Stevens for the excellent job they have done reviewing and organizing the proposed Code modifications for the 2007 Code Update. Chairman Rodriguez stated the primary focus of the August Commission meeting would be to consider eight (8) rule hearings.
REVIEW AND APPROVE AGENDA
Mr. Blair conducted a review of the meeting agenda as presented in each Commissioner’s files. He noted one item, the consideration of a settlement of the appeal of DCA 007-DEC-11, had been added to the agenda.
Mr. Richmond stated two additional waivers were brought before the Accessibility Advisory Council to include in their agenda. He stated the waiver requests added to the Commission’s agenda were for Florida International University and Florida Atlantic University.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the meeting agenda as amended. Commissioner Sanidas entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
REVIEW AND APPROVE JUNE 26 & 27, 2007 MEETING MINUTES AND FACILITATOR’S REPORTS
Chairman Rodriguez called for approval of the minutes and the facilitator’s reports from the June 2007 Commission meeting.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the June Commission meeting minutes as amended. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
CHAIR’S DISCUSSION ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Chairman Rodriguez first addressed Commission appointments. He stated he contacted the Governor’s appointment office on August 9, 2007 and spoke with David Mica, the analyst in charge of the Florida Building Commission appointments. He noted Mr. Mica had stated the intention is to make all of the appointments prior to the October 2007 meeting in Tampa. He explained the applications for various appointments has expired or contains soon to expire terms, 13 of the 23 positions, were currently being reviewed. He requested any Commission member who wished to remain on the Commission please submit their application to the Governor’s office right away, if they have not done so already. He stated the application could be found on the Governor’s office webpage, . He then stated if a Commissioner decided to rotate out of office, they will be a guest of the state of Florida and would be invited to the next Commission meeting for proper recognition. He then thanked Ila Jones and staff for their support.
Chairman Rodriguez next addressed the association product approval strategy change. He stated after consideration of the request of stakeholders for a workshop to review the issue of association product approvals for shutter manufacturers, review with staff and discussion with Commissioner Carson, it was determined the issue was already covered within the current Product Approval Rule. He explained instead of a special workshop the issue was referred back to the POC to determine how it should be addressed.
Chairman Rodriguez then addressed the special session which will convene on September 18, 2007, which was anticipated to last until the beginning of October. He stated, as had been done in the past, a notice for a Commission teleconference meeting has been scheduled for September 24, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. to keep the Commission informed. He then stated it would provide the Commission the opportunity to provide any input they wish to the Legislature on any one of the relevant issues. He noted Jim Richmond had been kind enough, as always, to be the link.
GOVERNOR’S EXECUTIVE ORDERS ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Chairman Rodriguez stated the Governor’s Order #07-127 was issued to establish actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Florida, with a component of the Executive Order as an impact on the energy performance requirements of the Florida Energy Code. He stated DCA secretary, Tom Pelham, is planning to attend the October Commission meeting in Tampa to meet with the Commission, and will provide the Commission with direction from the Governor.
REVIEW AND UPDATE OF COMMISSION WORKPLAN
Mr. Dixon conducted a review of the updated Commission workplan. (See Updated Commission Workplan August 2007)
Commissioner Mc Combs moved approval of the updated workplan. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
CONSIDER ACCESSIBILITY WAIVER APPLICATIONS
Chairman Rodriguez directed the Commission to Peter Kelegian for consideration of the Accessibility Waiver Applications. He first presented the consent agenda of waivers for approval:
Recommendation for Approval With no Conditions:
#1 Images Aesthetic Dentistry
Mr. Kelegian explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files.
#2 Rivertown Community Ballfield, Unit #1
Mr. Kelegian explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files.
#8 The Robin Shepard Group
Mr. Kelegian explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files.
#7 Cinema World at Vero Beach
Mr. Kelegian explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files.
Florida Atlantic University Arena
Mr. Kelegian explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files.
Commissioner Wiggins moved approval of the consent agenda of Council’s recommendations for approval for these applicants. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Recommendation for Approval with Conditions:
#6 Fillmore Miami Beach at the Jackie Gleason Theater
Mr. Kelegian explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the Council recommended the waiver be granted provided accessible seating locations are not directly adjacent to the aisles, flip-up arms are installed on aisle seats, and accessible seats have sightlines of 30 degrees.
Commissioner Wiggins moved approval of the Council’s recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
#10 USF Student Center
Mr. Kelegian explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the Council recommended the waiver be granted provided the accessible seating in the auditorium is moved back far enough to permit side access to ensure no accessible seating is directly on the aisle, ensure flip-up seating is provided on the aisle seats and 36 degree sightline at the front is reduced to no more than 30 degrees.
Commissioner Sanidas moved approval of the Council’s recommendation. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Florida International University Football Stadium Expansion
Mr. Kelegian explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the Council recommended the waiver be granted providing applicant submits supplemental drawings with changes requested including swinging doors to replace sliding doors to accessible skyboxes and the toilet stalls meet Florida specific requirements for lavatories.
Commissioner D’Andrea moved approval of the Council’s recommendation. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Recommendation for Deferral:
Charlotte County Cultural Center Theater
Inadequate information submitted and no representative appeared before Council.
College of Business Office Depot Center, FAU
Inadequate information submitted and no representative appeared before Council.
#9 Chiquita Animal Hospital
Inadequate information submitted and no representative appeared before Council.
Commissioner Wiggins entered a motion to approve Council’s recommendation for deferral for these applicants. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Withdrawn
#3 Domo Japones, LLC.
Commissioner Sanidas asked if these were public owned buildings.
Mr. Kelegian stated many of them were public owned buildings.
Commissioner Sanidas stated he did not think the Commission had the authority to change the accessibility code for public buildings.
Mr. Kelegian stated on specific final orders, where appropriate, it would be indicated the Commission does not have the authority to waive the relevant Title II requirements that would otherwise require accessibility.
Commissioner Norkunas stated his designation on the Commission is a representative of individuals within this state with disabilities, approximately 2.9 million people. He then stated he felt compelled to raise his voice against issues which would adversely affect a number of those individuals. He continued by stating the vote just taken was principally 20% disproportionality in the access issues just discussed. He stated the United States Congress, in passing the ADA, Section 303-A2, determined where there was an issue of disproportion in cost and scope, the work does not need to be done. He the stated comments were included. He then stated judges first look at the plain meaning of the language, but then they learned to look at the intent of the framers. He then quoted…“It reflects the intent of Congress to provide access for individuals with disabilities without causing economic hardship for the covered public accommodation and commercial facilities.” He continued by stating we now know it was the intent of Congress not to impose an economic hardship. He stated the 20% being continuously waived before the Advisory Council comes from ADAAG and states 20%. He further stated this was a rule, not a law. He then stated the Commission works on rules, but there are legislative laws the Commission cannot change. He expressed concern with individuals appearing before the waiver Council claiming 20% disproportionality when there is no evidence of economic hardship. He stated 20% is a number causing undue hardship for many disabled individuals by not allowing access in areas where it can clearly be afforded. He offered an example stating for a $17 million stadium, a $75,000 elevator is not disproportionate. He continued by explaining the 20% disproportionate cost was for smaller places of public accommodation, smaller restaurants, etc., who did not have the money. He further stated it seems these days, if an applicant hires the right people and pays them $5,000-$10,000, the vertical accessibility seems to become unnecessary. He expressed deep concern and stated he would continue to bring it to the Commission’s attention.
Chairman Rodriguez asked how the Commission could help. He asked if Commissioner Norkunas attended those Council meetings.
Commissioner Norkunas stated he was starting to learn the process. He stated Chairman Rodriguez had been very helpful to him. He then stated the Accessibility TAC will be discussing the 20% issue at the next meeting. He added while he could raise his personal opinions, he intends to go back and have it done through the system, perhaps at the next meeting. He reiterated his voice would continue to be heard in particular against public places seeking those waivers.
Chairman Rodriguez stated he understood. He added Commissioner Sanidas had also raised the issue previously.
Mr. Richmond stated he would be more than happy to work with Commissioner Norkunas between meetings. He explained the waivers are from the Florida specific requirements as opposed to the requirements of ADAAG and the ADA. He stated specifically where there is stadium seating, cost is not the issue being considered for the waiver, but technical infeasibility. He then stated under the Florida Vertical Accessibility Law, access to each and every tier would be required and that is technically infeasible given the constraints of the ramping and other factors.
Chairman Rodriguez stated the important thing is no one leaves with the impression the public sector was trying to put one over on the Commission. He then stated what is asked of the public sector is no less that what is requested of the private sector.
Mr. Richmond then stated each of the waivers presented at this meeting have met or exceeded the requirements of ADA. He stated the waivers are for the requirements over and above those.
Chairman Rodriguez expressed his appreciation for Mr. Richmond working with the Commissioners, to provide the best effort for the individuals concerned.
CONSIDER APPLICATIONS FOR PRODUCT AND ENTITY APPROVAL
Chairman Rodriguez directed the Commission to Commissioner Carson for presentation of entity approvals.
Commissioner Carson presented the POC recommendations for entity approval in the form of a motion as follows:
TST 6626 - Professional Service Industries Inc./Houston - Product Testing Laboratory
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
TST 2452 - Terrapin Testing Inc. - Product Testing Laboratory
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
TST 6781 - Intertek Testing Services Middleton Lab – Product Testing
Laboratory
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
CER – 3471 - PFS Corporation – Product Certification Agency
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation for approval with the condition the applicant must provide scope of accreditation and accreditation body, stationary, logo and signature. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Mr. Blair then presented the products for approval as they appeared in the matrix provided to each Commissioner. Recommended approvals were presented in consent agenda format with conditional approvals, deferrals, and denials being considered individually. (See Florida Building Commission Product Approval Applications)
Certification Method
Recommended for Approval
Product #’s: 239-R2; 243-R5; 251-R7; 253-R6; 498-R2; 539-R3; 1512-R2; 1548-R2; 6188-R1; 6189-R1; 8012; 8162-R1; 8500-R1; 8545; 8775; 8797-R1; 8802; 8825; 8856; 8873; 8874; 9052; 9054; 9063; 9064; 9065; 9066; 9075; 9076; 9077; 9079; 9081; 9085; 9086; 9091; 9097; 9098; 9099; 9103; 9108; 9109; 9110; 9114; 9115; 9117; 9119; 9123; 9124; 9125; 9126; 9127; 9129; 9130; 9133; 9135; 9136; 9137; 9138; 9139, 9140; 9141; 9142; 9144; 9145; 9146; 9147; 9150; 9151; 9152; 9153; 9154; 9155; 9156; 9158; 9160; 9161; 9164; 9165; 9172; 9177; 9183; 9186; 9187; 9189; 9190; 9192; 9196; 9197; 9199; 9200; 9202; 9211; 9212; 0213; 9214; 9215; 9216; 9217; 9218; 9220; 9222; 9223; 9224; 9226; 9230; 9232; 9235; 9236; 9242; 9247; 9249; 9251; 9253; 9262; 9265; 9266; 9276; 9280; 9292; 9297; 9300; 9303; 9305; 9307; 9308; 9309; 9310; 9311; 9312; 9313; 9314; 9327; 9331; 9333; 9335; 9337; 9340; 9341; 9342; 9343; 9344; 9347; 9351; 9353; 9354; 9357; 9358; 9359; 9361; 9370; 9374; 9375.
Commissioner Wiggins moved approval for the consent agenda. Commissioner Greiner entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Recommended for Conditional Approval
3742 American Skylites
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating certification agency to review installation drawings; application is to 2001 FBC.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
5167-R2 Simonton Windows
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating on installation Instructions, remove design pressures that are higher than certified.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
5968-R1 Hunter Panels
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating on products that indicate for use over OSB indicate that OSB option is not for use in the HVHZ; Indicate on product Cool Vent not to use in HVHZ because of the OSB facing.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
7101. RGM Products, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant was unable to verify design pressure of (-45) psf.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8865 Absolute Storm Protection
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the design pressure on application and installation exceeds certification.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8966 Absolute Storm Protection
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating under installation instructions, design pressure is exceeded.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8940 Alenco
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the application and the certificate do not have the load test; the applicant to specify and provide certification of laminate.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9051 Rixson
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant must indicate missile level for TAS 201.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9092 Technical Roofing Solutions
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating FM Class 4880 Standard is not FBC adopted. FM Class 4470, TAS 114 and UL 790 Standard Years are not FBC adopted. Needs to be corrected.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9105 Weather Shield Mfg., Inc
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to add ASTM E1886/1996 -2005 to the standards on application.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9118 Weather Shield Mfg., Inc.
9131 Peachtree Doors and Windows
9134 Peachtree Doors and Windows
Mr. Blair stated these products were recommended for conditional approval stating for Product .1, indicate “Yes” for use outside HVHZ.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9157 SNE Enterprises
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating ASTM E1886/1996 Standard Years are not FBC adopted.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9170 Pella Corporation
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating for Product 9170.1, Certification does not have the Load Test.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9206 Thermal Industries
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating for Product 9206.1, for Model/Number 55, Installation Instructions exceed DP on Application; For Model/Number 255, there are no Installation Instructions; For Product 9206.2; for Model/Number 255, there are no Installation Instructions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9207 Thermal Industries
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating there is no verifiable evidence of testing for AMMA/NWWDA 101/I.S. 2-97; For Models/Numbers 55/250/255, there are no Installation Instructions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9208 Thermal Industries
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating installation instructions are not for Applicant; For Model/Number 250, there are no installation instructions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9209 Thermal Industries
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating for Model/Number 250, there are no installation instructions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9275 Elixir Industries Georgia Door Division
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant must show hardware as tested; “No” is indicated for all “use outside HVHZ” in all Products.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9278 Andersen Corporation
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant must remove installation instructions, not part of NOA.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9315 MI Windows and Doors
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating AAMA/NWWDA 101/I.S.2-97 needs to be added to Standard List.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9317 Shwinco Industries Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating ASTM F842 is not FBC adopted; ASTM E1886/1996 are missing from the Standard list; For Products 9317.1 and .5 design pressure is exceeded.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9319 Flesher Windows, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating providing separate certification for flange and fin condition; Specify thickness and minimum grade of substrates. FL PE to validate rational analysis.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9324 Shwinco Industries Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating ASTM F842 is not FBC adopted. There is no verifiable evidence of testing for HVHZ. Design Pressure is exceeded.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9360 Flesher Windows, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating FL PE to validate rational analysis; this validation shall be with a hardcopy signed and sealed indicating compliance with anchor design; For Product 9360.3, the Certificate does not have the load test.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9365 Pella Corporation
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating or Product 9365.1, Load Test is not certified.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9366 Pella Corporation
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating for Product 9366.3, Load Test is not certified.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Recommended for Deferral
9120 Bevel King Door and Glass Co. Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating the applicant needs 3 specimens tested per TAS202; report only shows one. Certificates by NAMI not signed; both products are the same, remove 9120.2
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation of deferral. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9362 Flesher Windows, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating FL PE to validate rational analysis; this validation shall be with a hardcopy signed and sealed indicating compliance with anchor design; remove glass configuration that is not certified; on 9362.1 IG glass is not certified; remove, If used, needs to be safety glazed lites for use on a door. If in fact this door was tested to TAS201 and TAS203 and passed using the dry glazed detail provided, the gaskets used must be further detailed and show standards of conformance, or test to weathering requirements of the HVHZ. If the HS single lite in the IG is changed for tempered, it must be tested for TAS201 and TAS203.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation of deferral. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Recommended for Denial
1492-R1Streuli Sales, Inc
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for denial the applicant did not comply with conditions of deferral of Model/Number/Name does not correspond to Certification Models; There is no verifiable evidence of testing of Standard 101/I.S.2-97 in the Certifications; There is no verifiable evidence of testing of Impact Resistance in the Certifications; There are no Installation Instructions for “Tahoe Fiberglass” nor for “Madera Grande”.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation of denial. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9338 Traco Windows and Doors, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for denial stating the ASTM E1886/1996 are not certified by Certification Agency. AAMA Certificate is not for Model/Number on Application. AAMA Certificate expired 11/18/06. There is no verifiable evidence of testing for Impact Resistant. Design Pressure is exceeded. There are no Installation Instructions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation of denial. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9339 Traco Windows and Doors, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for denial stating the ASTM E1886/1996 are not certified by Certification Agency. AAMA Certificate is not for Model/Number on Application. There is no verifiable evidence of testing for Impact Resistant. Design Pressure is exceeded. There are no Installation Instructions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation of denial. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9345 Traco Windows and Doors, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for denial stating the ASTM E1886/1996 are not certified by Certification Agency. AAMA Certificate is not for Model/Number on Application. AAMA Certificate expired 6/23/06. There is no verifiable evidence of testing for Impact Resistant. Design Pressure is exceeded. There are no Installation Instructions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation of denial. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9350 GAF Materials Corporation
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for denial stating there is no Certification Agency Certificate. The ICC evaluation report is not for the products on application. Product is not properly described. Provide proper subcategory. CS/HB 7057 Wind Loss Mitigation is not an adopted standard.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation of denial. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Incomplete Applications
Product #’s: 8844; 9057; 9087; 9089; 9080; 9188.
No Commission action necessary.
Evaluation by Architect or Engineer
Recommended for Approval
Product #’s: 6067-R2; 6136-R2; 6218-R8; 6644-R2; 7346-R1; 8080; 8087-R1; 8248-R1; 8450-R1; 8472-R3; 8570; 8572; 8722; 8753; 8867; 8982-R1; 9033; 9067; 9068; 9069; 9071; 9104; 9107; 9143; 9149; 9162; 9174; 9184; 9191; 9193; 9219; 9225; 9231; 9245; 9248; 9250; 9255; 9256; 9257; 9258; 9259; 9261; 9267; 9270; 9282; 9283; 9284; 9288; 9289; 9291; 9293; 9294; 9295; 9296; 9298; 9299; 9301; 9302; 9304; 9318; 9320; 9322; 9328; 9329; 9330; 9352; 9364; 9371; 9373.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the consent agenda. Commissioner McCombs entered a second. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Recommended for Conditional Approval
7873-R3 USA Shutter Company LLC
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating applicant requested conditional to upload clarification on anchor calculations.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8524-R1 Town and Country Industries, Inc.
8691 Mullets Aluminum
8932 Lynn Metal Company, Inc.
9274 Sika Sarnafil, Inc.
9326 Vi Win Tech
Mr. Blair stated these products were recommended for conditional approval stating hardcopy of evaluation report signed and sealed by evaluator was missing.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
2291-R2 Metals USA Building Products
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the product has not been tested for HVHZ requirements; indicate "No" for use within HVHZ.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8237 URoll Shutters
8615 URoll Shutters
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating hardcopy of evaluation report signed and sealed by evaluator was missing; Evaluation report does not indicate impact testing of storm bars and mullions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8647 Elite Aluminum Corporation
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating hardcopy of evaluation report signed and sealed by evaluator was missing. Provide detail of tested condition, including connecting channel to structure. - Was Conditional Approved May 2007 with conditions of: - ASTM E72 is not an adopted standard in the 2004 FBC. Installation instructions are not as tested. Some of the test reports are not signed and sealed by FL PE. Others have pages that are illegible. r-a 5/17/2007 Applicant requested to be set for Aug. 2007 hearing and changed the evaluation report.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8724 URoll Shutters
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating hardcopy of evaluation report signed and sealed by evaluator was missing. Evaluation report does not indicate impact testing or use of storm bars and mullions. Product deflection is excessive for shutters within HVHZ.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8884 Platinum Advanced Technologies, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the installation instructions do not indicate the attachment to the structure. Drawings should also be made legible. Was a Conditional Approval from June 2007 with conditions of: Indicate "No" for use within HVHZ unless the plastic materials are tested in accordance with HVHZ requirements. Installation instructions do not load. ASTM E72 is not an adopted testing standard. Change to Evaluation Report by FL PE
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8987 AmeriGuard
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating evaluation report does not indicate max span tested. Provide test report to substantiate span and demonstrate tested to 104" span.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8988 Bay City Window Company
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating hardcopy of evaluation report signed and sealed by evaluator was missing. Move 1714.5 to the "Sections of the Code" on application.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9102 Southern Extrusion, Inc
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating applicant requested to correct error on material component.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9159 MasterCraft Engineering
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating products do not comply with Section 2321.7. Indicate "No" for use inside HVHZ.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9252 Complex Industries
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating hardcopy of evaluation report signed and sealed by evaluator was missing. Remove product 9252.4.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9176 Designer Doors Incorporated
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating installation instructions do not indicate attachment to structure.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9334 Town and Country Industries, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating ASTM B209 Standard Year is not FBC adopted. FBC adopted is 1996. Application has 2004. Evaluation Report is incomplete.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9356 CAT-5 Protection, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating how do the specified overlap dimensions called out on elevations in sheet 1 of drawings conform with FBC 2413.7.2, where a minimum of 1.5 times the separation is required? Check and verify.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9368 Taylor Building Products
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant requested conditional to correct hinge line dimensions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Recommended for Deferral
1850-R2; 6566-R1; 7288-R2; 8200-R2; 8523-R1 American Shutter Systems Association, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating the Association issue is being referred to staff and stakeholders to bring a resolution to the next POC
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
1899-R2 Alumiglass, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating units larger than 96" mull span and .32 sq. ft. were not tested; Remove needs to show compatibility of structural adhesive and aluminum with qualified coating finish.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9024 Agriboard Industries
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral to complete tests. Attachment of product to structure is not detailed. On the tests to comply with Sect. 2315.1.11 the connector tests were not conducted. Indicate "No" for use within HVHZ. Conditional Approval from June 2007 meeting with conditions of: ASTM E72 is not FBC adopted. Evaluation Report, Page 3 of 3, Tests Performed, Item #3, equates E84-01 with E84-95. This should be included under Equivalency of Product Standards in Application. Indicate "No" for use within HVHZ unless tested for the requirements of Sect, 2315.1.11. Upload evaluation ESR-1582 that is referred to on installation instructions.
Commissioner Schulte stated the first five products that were motioned on the recommendation was the association issue being referred to the Structural TAC. He then stated he did not believe the issue was the issue that went back before the TAC. He added he believed there was a declaratory statement which was being sent back to the Structural TAC.
Commissioner Carson stated Mr. Schulte was correct. He then stated the issue was the association was going to get together with staff and go over the different options presented and bring it back to the POC.
Mr. Blair stated a motion to reconsider would then be necessary if this was the case.
Commissioner Browdy moved approval to reconsider. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
1850-R2; 6566-R1; 7288-R2; 8200-R2; 8523-R1 American Shutter Systems Association, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating the association issue has been referred to staff and stakeholders to bring back a proposal to the Product Approval POC at the next meeting. He then stated the recommendation made to the POC would be made to the Commission that same meeting in October
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9169 Baker Metal Works & Supply, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating Product 9169.1 tested with self-adhered roofing underlayment; Results of testing could be unreliable. Referred to Roofing TAC for a determination.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9175 Westshore Glass Corp.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating hardcopy of evaluation report signed and sealed by evaluator was missing; There is no specification of materials (frame, glass, gaskets, anchors, etc.); Attachment of product to structure is not detailed; Details of glazing are missing (Bite, D.L.O).
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9323; 9325 United Storm Shutter Association
Mr. Blair stated these products were recommended for deferral stating indicate polycarbonate brand as tested and provide testing of the specific brand to comply with Sect. 2612; Remove note on masonry screws by United Storm Shutter Assoc. and indicate the particular brand as tested; Verify that polycarbonate blades were tested adjacent to each other for TAS 201, and that it is the basis for maximum deflection; Component information missing on the drawings.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Recommended for Denial
4690-R1 Westshore Glass Corp.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for denial stating there is no specification of materials (frame, glass, gaskets, anchors, etc.); Attachment of product to structure is not detailed; Details of glazing are missing (Bite, D.L.O); Remove blank model (4690.48).
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
4990-R1 Westshore Glass Corp.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for denial stating there is no specification of materials (frame, glass, gaskets, anchors, etc.) Attachment of product to structure is not detailed. Details of glazing are missing (Bite, D.L.O). Provide hardware as tested. Verify transome was tested with the doors.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
4999-R1 Westshore Glass Corp.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for denial stating there is no specification of materials (frame, glass, gaskets, anchors, etc.). Attachment of product to structure is not detailed. Details of glazing are missing (Bite, D.L.O). Glassclad polycarbonate glazing needs to show compliance with Ch 26.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
8707 Best Rolling Doors, Inc
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for denial stating conditional from May 2007 did not comply with: Remove sizes and pressures larger than tested.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Incomplete Applications
9166 Wayne-Dalton Corp.
No Commission action necessary.
Evaluation by Test Report
Recommended for Approval
Product #’s: 8313; 9179; 9180
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the consent agenda. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Recommended for Conditional Approval
8055 Trac-Rite Door, Inc
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the Certificate of Independence does not comply with Rule 9B-72.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9287 GAF Materials Corporation
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the document the ownership of the tests by the applicant.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Recommended for Deferral
8799 Madison Ind., Inc. of Georgia
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the installation instructions has attachment of panels different from test report. Installation instructions contain moment and reaction values that are not a part of the test report. This includes rational analysis. Remove all engineering or change method, if method is changed, then: The Allowable listed in the drawings seems to be taken from test pressure, when they should be from design loads. If rating the panels per these limits, the EI value must also be listed. Limit design pressures per applicable deflection of l/240 on FL8799.1.
Chairman Rodriguez asked if the reasons for each deferral recommendation must be read.
Mr. Richmond explained the way the deferrals were set up for recommendation at this point He stated the applicant still had to consent to the recommendation. He stated if the applicant failed to consent it would move into the denials. He then stated the reasons for denial have to be on record which is why each individual deferral has to be heard.
Chairman Rodriguez asked for clarification each time there is a deferral it would be read at the deferral and at the approval.
Mr. Richmond stated it is heard twice, the second time hopefully on the consent agenda for approval, thereby not hearing the reasons again.
9203 Donovan Advanced Hurricane Protection, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating drawings do not have the testing lab seal. Product shall have a label indicating preventing exposure to UV when there are no hurricane events. There is no analysis of loads on supporting structures depending on installation of product. Change method to evaluation by PE to indicate loads and reactions and attachment conditions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
9273 Donovan Advanced Hurricane Protection, Inc.
Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating the test reports do not comply with HVHZ impact testing requirements. Drawings do not have the testing lab seal. Product shall have a label indicating preventing exposure to UV when there are no hurricane events. There is no analysis of loads on supporting structures depending on installation of product. Change method to evaluation by PE to indicate loads and reactions and attachment conditions.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Incomplete Applications
8789 Drexel Metals Corporation
9059 Winco Window Company
9060 Winco Window Company
9061 Winco Window Company
9062 Winco Window Company
9090 Truco Inc.
No Commission action necessary.
Evaluation by Evaluation Entity
Recommendation for Approval
Product #’s: 7987; 9095; 9316.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the consent agenda. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
CONSIDER LEGAL ISSUES AND PETITIONS FOR DECLARATORY STATEMENT:BINDING INTERPRETATIONS:
DECLARATORY STATEMENTS:
Binding Interpretations:
Petition 15: Section 1010.8
Mr. Richmond stated the petition was rejected because it was not heard by
the local Board of Rules and Appeals
Petition 19: Section 424.2.17.1.2
Mr. Richmond explained the conclusion stated outside swimming pools shall be provided with a barrier in accordance with Chapter 515 and the FBC provisions relating to swimming pools. He then stated there is no further action necessary by the Commission. He noted both petitions were available for review.
Declaratory Statements:
Second Hearings:
DCA07-DEC-105 by Leonard Devine, Palm Beach County Building Department
Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
First Hearings:
DCA07-DEC-085 by Walter A Tillit, Jr. PE, TilTeco Inc
Mr. Richmond stated this petition was subject to dismissal. No action needed.
DCA07-DEC-110
Mr. Richmond stated this petition had been withdrawn.
DCA07-DEC-115 by Kelly Carman, PE, Leo A Daly
Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
DCA07-DEC-116 by Jeffrey K. Hulsberg, PE, Hulsberg Engineering, Inc.
Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.
Commissioner Wiggins moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner Browdy entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
DCA07-DEC-133 by Kenneth R. Pfeiffer, PE, Pfeiffer Engineering, Inc.
Mr. Richmond stated the petition had been withdrawn.
DCA07-DEC-135 by Emil Vekesnefeld, PE
Mr. Richmond stated the petition has been deferred to obtain additional information.
DCA07-DEC-136 by Billy Tyson, CBO, CRA Architects
Mr. Richmond stated the petition has been withdrawn.
DCA07-DEC-141 by John Leedy, PE, Leedy Electric Corp.
Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.
Commissioner Wiggins moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
DCA07-DEC-145 by Jody L. Barrows, JLB Drafting
Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.
Commissioner Bassett expressed concern as it seems this company is a
drafting company practicing engineering without a license. He stated his concern would be the Commission’s role by responding.
Mr. Richmond explained declaratory statements are not assisting in the
license and practice of engineering. He stated they are simply answers to questions regarding the interpretation of the Building Code. He then stated how it is put into use by the individual who obtains it and would be solely that individual’s responsibility.
Commissioner Kidwell stated in the request for declaratory statement the
question states “if an engineer is able to prove by design and calculations the foundation…” He noted it sounded as if the question was being asked for an engineer, not in lieu of an engineer.
Commissioner Sanidas added he understood the question to be referring to the foundation only. He stated if an engineer was needed, the engineer should be involved with project above and below ground; otherwise he would not be doing his job properly.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the committee recommendation.
Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried
DCA07-DEC-146 by Jody L. Barrows, JLB
Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.
Commissioner D’Andrea expressed concern with answering question #3. He stated to avoid confusion he felt it important to clarify the Florida Building Code is applied when addressing the specific issue if a local government can pass a local ordinance. He further stated local governments do have local ordinances that define what a temporary building is relative to zoning requirements
Mr. Richmond stated that would be the intent and the way it would be drafted.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
DCA07-DEC-11 by Clements, Rutherford & Associates
Mr. Richmond explained the issues pertained to a declaratory statement obtained by Clements, Rutherford & Associates subject to appeal in this case by the same party, McGrath, who were represented at this Commission meeting. He explained an appeal was filed with the 1st District Court of Appeal, appealing the declaratory statement entered by the Commission, which was currently pending. He continued by stating, after discussions with both the department and the appellant in the case, a proposal to the Commission to resolve the issue would be essentially to turn back the clock. He stated the settlement was drafted, and available for the Chairman’s signature, would result in the District Court of Appeals remanding the issue to the Building Commission, who would rescind the declaratory statement entered in DCA07-DEC-11. He stated at that point, the issue would be subject to normal processes and procedures. He then stated there were some concerns relative to the declaratory statement, whether the scope of the question that had been asked, etc., as well as some drafting glitches. He explained this was an opportunity to get the record back and deal with it in due course.
Commissioner Wiggins requested clarification concerning which declaratory statement was being discussed.
Mr. Richmond stated this was the first declaratory statement dealt with from Clements, Rutherford & Associates on the issue of cement bonded particle board and the testing standard that applied. He explained the issue was whether a ten minute test was sufficient and the result anticipated by the petitioner was a response that the standard does not provision a time limit at all. He stated it is a test by which the success is measured by returning to a certain temperature. He continued by stating there was some collateral problems with some of the language that got into the order and resulted in the appeal.
Commissioner Wiggins moved approval of the settlement agreement as described. Commissioner Greiner entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
CONSIDER COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Accessibility TAC
Commissioner Gross presented the report of the Accessibility TAC. (See Accessibility TAC Minutes August 20, 2007).
Commission actions required:
1) Reschedule the date for Hotel Charette for June 2008 at the tentative meeting in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the recommendation of the
TAC. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
2) Direct staff to contact BOAF to alert them this was Chapter 11, not the Accessibility manual from ICC, because it only includes some of Chapter 11, plus other material which is not applicable to Florida.
Chairman Gross explained the ICC is advertising the manual with the Building Code Updates and it has already caused some confusion for building officials and designers using the manual. He added the recommendation also would include talking to ICC regarding their marketing.
Commissioner Gross moved approval of the recommendation of the TAC.
Commissioner Greiner entered a second to the motion.
Commissioner Sanidas asked if ICC had requested staff to edit their products that go out, such as the Florida Code.
Mr. Madani responded only under the Commission’s name is the Florida Building Code.
Commissioner Sanidas asked if staff had seen what ICC has marketed.
Mr. Madani stated they had seen ICC material available, but staff has not reviewed it.
Chairman Rodriguez asked if the publisher was ICC.
Commissioner Gross stated ICC did not publish the book. He explained ICC was marketing the book, including it in some Code advertisements which create s some confusion.
Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
3) 2 additional agenda items for the October Commission meeting of the Accessibility TAC: 20% rule discussion and re-discuss the alteration versus new construction standards.
Commissioner Gross moved approval of the TAC recommendation. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Commissioner D’Andrea moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Code Administration TAC
Commissioner Wiggins presented the report of the Code Administration TAC. (See Code Administration TAC Minutes August 20, 2007).
Commissioner D’Andrea moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Electrical TAC
Commissioner McCombs presented the report of the Electrical TAC. (See Electrical TAC Minutes August 20, 2007).
Commissioner D’Andrea moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Energy TAC
Commissioner Greiner presented the report of the Energy TAC. (See Energy TAC Minutes August 20, 2007)
Commissioner Browdy moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Mechanical TAC
Commissioner Bassett presented the report of the Mechanical TAC. (See Mechanical TAC Meeting Minutes August 20, 2007)
Commissioner D’Andrea moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Browdy entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Structural TAC
Commissioner Kim presented the report of the Structural TAC. (See Structural TAC Meeting Minutes August 20, 2007)
Commissioner D’Andrea moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Education POC
Chairman Browdy presented the report of the Education POC. (See Education POC Meeting Minutes August 21, 2007)
Commission actions required:
1) Draft language of the Disciplinary Accreditation Rule
Commissioner Browdy stated Mr. Richmond has revised and commented on the proposed language developed from the Product Approval Rule template. He stated the request would be for a rule development workshop to be held at the December 2007 Commission meeting to discuss the proposed language.
Commissioner Wiggins moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
2) Disclaimer language as it would appear on course which preceded the 50% content rule.
Commissioner Browdy explained the language was as follows… “This course
may require updating to be in compliance with the current version of the Florida Building Code or to meet the administrative rule requirements such as the percentage of code content requirement.”
Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner Carson entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
3) Ownership of courses:
Commissioner Browdy stated the following motion was approved by the POC “The Commission would give away free of charge all DCA developed courses which are currently being sold to private providers for the purposes of updating to the current edition of the Code.”
Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Commissioner Sanidas stated it should be made clear it is the document alone being given to them, not the right to conduct a course.
Commissioner Browdy stated Commissioner Sanidas was correct. He explained the course given to them is outdated, but in consideration of them updating the course, they would receive this one free of charge.
Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Commissioner Browdy then asked for the Commission’s approval of the following courses:
Advanced-Chapter 5 and 6 in the Fla. Building Code #242, BCIC, LLC…Approved 07/26/07
Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Advanced Fire Resistance and Fire Protection in the Fla. Building Code #243, BCIC, LLC…Approved 07/26/07.
Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Advanced Means of Egress in the Fla. Building Code#244, BCIC, LLC…Approved 07/26/07.
Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. Commissioner Carson entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Advanced Occupancies & Type of Construction in the Fla. Building Code, #241, BCIC, LLC…Approved 07/26/07.
Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Advanced Overview of the Fla. Residential Code #245, BCIC, LLC…Approved 07/26/07.
Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Internal Pressure Wind Design #246, Department of Community Affairs – TRP…Approved 07/30/07.
Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Private Pools and Spas Advanced Module FBC 2004, 05, 06 Supplements #248, BRD Code Educators, Inc….Advanced 07/30/07.
Commissioner McCombs moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Advanced Building Code: Residential Swimming Pools #240, American Landscape Architects Fla. Chapter…Approved 07/02/07.
Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Commissioner McCombs moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Product Approval/Prototype Buildings/Manufactured Buildings POC
Commissioner Carson presented the report of the Product Approval/Prototype Buildings/Manufactured Buildings POC. (See Product Approval/Prototype Buildings/Manufactured Buildings POC Meeting Minutes August 20, 2007)
Commission actions required:
1) Additional rule on hearing on Rule 9B-72 during the October 2007 Commission meeting to consider schedule for penalties for validation entities.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion.
Mr. Richmond stated this would actually be the outcome of the supplemental rule hearing scheduled on this meeting’s agenda.
Chairman Rodriguez asked if the motion needed to be withdrawn.
Mr. Richmond stated the motion should be withdrawn and saved until public comment.
Commissioner Carson withdrew the motion.
2) POC recommended proposed by product approval administration to add a conditional validation deadline date 7 days prior to the new products application deadline.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the committee recommendation.
Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
3) POC recommendation move validation deadline for 2008, 2 days prior to the current scheduling to 21 days from the validation deadline.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
4) POC recommendation request begin revocation of FL 1453, FL143-R1 and FL 6112 due to the lack of a quality assurance program.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
5) POC recommended consideration of DCA07-DEC-085 by Walter A. Tillit, Jr. be deferred until next meeting for additional information with assignment of the declaratory statement to the Structural TAC.
Mr. Richmond explained the declaratory statement was inadvertently listed on
the legal report as to be dismissed. He stated there were no actions by the Commission and no motion to be dismissed; therefore deferral would be the appropriate action.
Commissioner Carson moved approval of the committee recommendation. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion.
Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Commissioner McCombs moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Budget Committee
Mr. Dixon stated a Budget Committee meeting was held at the June 2007 Commission meeting in Miami. He then stated staff presented the 2007-2008 fiscal year budget for the Commission which had been appropriated by the Legislature. He noted there were questions regarding additional on packages and combinations of different individual codes would be presented or provided by the ICC for the 2007 Florida Building Code. He stated the information has been obtained by staff and will be emailed to the Commissioners to review the proposed prices for 2007 Florida Building Code. He then stated an additional meeting would be held at the October Commission meeting. He continued by stating the Governor has called a special session for adjustment of the state agencies budgets, which will be a roll back of 4-10% depending on what the Legislature and the Governor decide. He stated he hoped to have a report for the Commission on the outcome of that by the October Commission meeting
Commissioner Browdy moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Termite Workgroup
Mr. Blair stated the Termite Workgroup met in June 2007 in Gainesville. He stated the workgroup was asked for the 2007 update that took place in March in St Augustine. He explained the main issue for the TAC was to address the potential for termite entry through the angular space created by sleeve pipes that penetrate foundations. He continued by stating the workgroup met with plumbers, pipe manufacturers, scientists, the Department of Agriculture and other various stakeholders. He stated a recommendation for a code change was submitted and at the rule development workshop in June the Commission took action on the recommendation with a slight revision per Commissioner Vann’s recommendation and it was approved. He further stated it would most likely be approved at this Commission meeting as part of the code update.
Commissioner Browdy moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner McCombs entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
UPDATE ON CODE ADMINISTRATION ASSESSMENT PROJECT
Chairman Rodriguez stated Mr. Blair has been working on the project which assesses the code administration needs of local governments and considers measures to improve the uniform and effective enforcement of the Code. He noted the task is number 13 of the Commission workplan. He continued by stating an end result will be an assessment report with recommendations to the Code Administration TAC and to the Commission. He then stated in June Mr. Blair was designing an online survey to ensure the needs and the views of the broadest possible spectrum of local jurisdictions are considered.
Mr. Blair stated subsequent to the June meeting he had put together a draft survey working with DCA staff, and once draft was put together a prototype was put online. He then stated he had extensive conversations with Doug Harvey of BOAF and Don Fuchs, Executive Director of BOAF, regarding how to get this out to building officials. He noted as of yesterday it was mailed out to more than 2,000 building officials in the state and hopefully responses will be received soon. He reiterated the survey is online and there have been responses from some Commissioners and others who are involved in code administration. He encouraged anyone in that field of expertise to take time to complete the survey before the deadline, which is at the end of August. He continued by stating there were a lot of questions involved in the survey. He stated it expanded beyond the original set of questions drafted for the survey. He then stated he believed it would provide the Commission with a lot of good information hopefully good recommendations will come forth. He concluded by stating he would put together an assessment report to present at the Code Administration TAC for their consideration and recommendations back to the Commission by the end of the year.
Commissioner Browdy asked if responses from questionnaire in which a building official, plans examiner, plans inspector, etc how will response be determined if they all work in the same place but answer the questions differently? He asked how those things would be weighted to determine the appropriate value of the response.
Mr. Blair explained the responses are not weighted one against the other. He stated responses will be compiled to be reviewed by the TAC, as was done with the Triennial Update.
RULE ADOPTION HEARINGS
Chairman Rodriguez stated the Commission would be considering eight rule adoption hearings after a review of the procedural issues from Mr. Richmond and process issues from Mr. Blair. He explained to the Commission for Rule 9B-3.0475, Wind Mitigation Retrofits the Commission would need to move to proceed with rule adoption with no further changes in order to fulfill the legislative mandate of implementation by October 1, 2007. He stated there was awareness some of the techniques could benefit from additional enhancements and he explained work would continue with stakeholders during the Glitch Cycle to ensure their concerns are addressed. He then explained the Commission should approve the final changes to Rule 9B-3047, Florida Building Code Rule, in order to meet the January 1, 2008 publication deadline and the October 1, 2008 implementation date. Chairman Rodriguez then directed the Commission to Mr. Richmond and Mr. Blair for procedural review.
Mr. Richmond explained the procedural issues involved in the rule development process.
Mr. Blair conducted a review the process for rule development.
The following portion of the Commission meeting was derived from notes:
SUPPLEMENTAL RULE ADOPTION HEARING ON RULE 9B-7.0042 FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE
Chairman Rodriguez explained that the rule development effort is being conducted in order to implement the Accessibility TAC’s recommendations to the Commission regarding integrating standards for marking accessible parking spaces and addressing curb ramp width eliminating an erroneous exception. He stated the August hearing is the final step in the process to implement by rule these Accessibility amendments (section 11-4.6.4 and section 11-4.7.3 respectively).
Mr. Richmond opened the rule adoption hearing. He then projected a draft of
the rule.
Chairman Rodriguez opened for public comment.
Larry Schneider, AIA
Mr. Schneider recommended removing the strikethrough of the words “meeting requirements of.” He referenced Section 11.4.8.3 suggesting a change to width of “curb ramps,” stating Section 11.4.7.3 would not change.
Mr. Richmond closed the hearing.
Chairman Rodriguez opened for Commission comments or discussion.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval to proceed with rule adoption for Rule 9B-7.0042, the Florida Accessibility Code Rule, integrating and noticing the approved changes and proceeding with rule adoption without conducting an additional hearing. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
SUPPLEMENTAL RULE ADOPTION HEARING ON RULE 7.003, FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE
Chairman Rodriguez explained that the rule development effort is being conducted in order to implement the Accessibility TAC’s recommendations to the Commission regarding updating the accessibility waiver request form. At the June hearing the Commission voted to conduct a supplemental rule adoption hearing in order to role in Rule 9B-7.003, the accessibility waiver application form. The August hearing is the final step in the process to implement by rule this Accessibility amendment.
Mr. Richmond opened the rule adoption hearing. He then projected a draft of the rule.
Chairman Rodriguez opened for public comment.
Larry Schneider, AIA
Mr. Schneider stated he could not find the petition form on the website and requested a copy of the form.
Mr. Madani stated the form was located in the area of the website with 2007 FBC amendments.
Chairman Rodriguez expressed concern regarding the difficulty in finding forms.
Mr. Richmond closed the hearing. He then stated since no public comment was offered requesting change, the motion needed was to proceed with rule adoption.
Commissioner McCombs moved approval to proceed with rule adoption. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
SUPPLEMENTAL RULE ADOPTION HEARING ON RULE 9B-72, PRODUCT APPROVAL
Chairman Rodriguez reported that the Product Approval Validation Workgroup worked for over a year to develop a consensus package of recommendations regarding the validation requirements of the Product Approval Rule. He stated the workgroup concluded their work in June of 2006 and the Commission reviewed the recommendations during the fall of 2006. He continued by stating the Commission’s Product Approval POC held a special meeting on January 24, 2007 to review the proposed changes and provide the POC’s recommendations to the Commission. He then stated the POC met again on February 5, 2007 and reviewed and recommended to the Commission additional revisions proposed by staff, which the Commission adopted during a February Rule Development Workshop. He added the Commission conducted a supplemental rule development workshop at the May meeting and adopted additional Product Approval POC recommendations for revisions to the Rule including the integration of the Window Labeling Workgroup’s consensus recommendations for requirements for installation instruction submittals for product approval applications. He stated In June the Commission conducted a rule adoption hearing and voted to conduct a supplemental hearing regarding a disciplinary process for validators. He concluded by stating the August rule adoption hearing, assuming no additional changes, represents the final step in the adoption of this round of revisions to
Rule 9B-72.
Mr. Richmond opened the rule adoption hearing.
Commissioner Carson reviewed the changes to the rule draft schedule for penalties for validation entities proposed by the Product Approval POC.
Chairman Rodriguez called for public comment. No one approached for comment.
Mr. Richmond closed the hearing.
Commissioner Carson moved to proceed with rule adoption for Rule 9B-72,the Product Approval Rule, by conducting a supplemental rule adoption hearing regarding a schedule for penalties for validation entities at the October , 2007 Commission meeting. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
RULE ADOPTION HEARING ON RULE 9B-74, PROTOTYPE BUILDING
Chairman Rodriguez explained at the May meeting the Commission voted to conduct a rule development workshop on Prototype Buildings to decide how to deal with the Program not having an administrator after June 20, 2007. He stated at the June meeting the Commission conducted a rule development workshop and voted to repeal the program. He further stated the August rule adoption hearing is the final step in the process to repeal the program.
Mr. Richmond opened the rule adoption hearing.
Chairman Rodriguez called for public comment. No one approached for comment.
Mr. Richmond closed the hearing.
Commissioner Greiner moved to proceed with rule adoption for Rule 9B-74, the Prototype Building Rule by filing the rule Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
RULE DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP ON RULE 9B-3.0472, CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTORS
Chairman Rodriguez noted at the June 2007 meeting the Commission conducted a rule development workshop on carbon monoxide detectors in order to implement the 2007 legislative direction regarding this issue. He stated the August rule adoption hearing is the final step in the process to finalize the rule.
Mr. Richmond opened the hearing.
Chairman Rodriguez called for public comment.
Wendell Peters, AGO Resources, Representing Florida Heating and Gas
Mr. Peters stated the rule should also require language from the law regarding hotel boilers.
Mr. Dixon explained the Commission must wait until the Department of Business and Professional Regulation establishes rules then those will be integrated into the 2007 FBC during the glitch amendment cycle.
Robert Trumbower
Mr. Trumbower suggested the language of the rule should follow the language in the law regarding “new construction.”
Commissioner McCombs stated the language will be worked out during the glitch process.
Dave Balencore, Walt Disney World
Mr. Balencore stated the rule should address specific requirements for hotels.
Mr. Richmond closed the hearing.
Mr. Blair asked for the motion to be restated.
Mr. Richmond stated the motion was to proceed with rule adoption for Rule 9B-3.0472, Carbon Monoxide Detectors, integrating and noticing the approved changes recommended by the Mechanical and Electrical TAC’s and proceeding with rule adoption without conducting an additional hearing.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval to proceed with rule adoption for Rule 9B-3.0472, Carbon Monoxide Detectors, integrating and noticing the approved changes recommended by the Mechanical and Electrical TAC’s and proceeding with rule adoption without conducting an additional hearing Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
RULE DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP ON RULE 9B-3.0475 WIND MITIGATION RETROFITS
Chairman Rodriguez provided a summary of the rule development up to this point then stated the retrofit rule must be completed at the meeting in order to fulfill the Legislative mandate of implementation by October, 1, 2007.
Resume meeting summary provided by audio recording:
Mr. Richmond opened the rule development workshop
Chairman Rodriguez opened for public comment.
Cam Fentriss, Representative for Florida Roofing, Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors Association
Ms. Fentriss stated written comments were submitted by hand on August 8, 2007 at the workshop which was held in Tampa. She stated the letter, dated August 7, 2007, articulated the concerns of the association and provided some proposed rule change language for things thought possible to change. She continued by stating the association recognized a number of things with respect to the proposed rule and those efforts which have to be changed by law and not administrative rule. She noted it was important to still raise those concerns and at the appropriate time the Commission will be asked for its’ support in their approach to the Legislature asking them to delay implementation because there are too many problems associated with the rule.
Bill Cone, President of Florida Roofing, Sheet Metal, and Air Conditioning Contractors Association
Mr. Cone asked if during public comment issues raised would be brought back up for discussion or addressed. He stated if not, he wanted to express some concerns of his industry, as well as multiple other industries affected by the rule, including building officials, relative to how implementation would occur; such as what happens and what gets done. He continued by stating there were questions regarding what the 15% clause in the rule applies to; whether it is actual work, forensics or just 15%. He then stated when this bill goes for the language will be totally unworkable at this point for any entity to enforce. He stated the association questions how the rule would be enforced. He explained the association has heard multiple different understandings of how it would be enforced. He then stated some of the biggest concerns are who is going to do the work and how will it get accomplished. He continued by stating if the forensics is part of the 15%, no one will get help.
Chairman Rodriguez stated the Commission shares his concerns. He then stated, with all due respect to the Legislature, this is what happens when mandates are sent instead of questions and recommendations.
Mr. Cone stated that is why the Florida Roofing, Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Association is going to ask the support of the Commission as they move forward with the request for at least a delay with implementation with the law to allow time to sit down at the table with all parties involved and figure out what it will take for implementation. He then stated 15% of a $20,000 re-roof does not go very far when discussing forensics and going by the guidelines of this code language.
Bob Boyer, BOAF
Mr. Boyer echoed a lot of the same concerns as FRSA. He continued by stating the understanding of constraints put on the Commission, but the association has to support FRSA on this issue because there are too many unanswered questions.
Robert Lecky, Palm Beach County Building Official and Chairman of Palm Beach County Building Code Advisory Board
Mr. Lecky stated concerns with the implementation of this rule because it does not recognize the use of state of the art wind mitigation techniques for over 20 years in his community. He continued by stating the Advisory Board he chairs consists of 7 building officials appointed by each Commission District and of the 16 members, the rest are architect, engineer, plumber, electrical, etc. very much like the Building Commission. He then stated the charge of that board was to provide uniformity of interpretation throughout the county and there has been very successful doing so. He explained he brought one exhibit, Palm Beach County Structural Requirements for 1 and 2 families from 1986, which reads” This appendix is based on the minimum connection uplift load of 855lbs for member spacing of 24 inches on center, 570lbs for member spacing of 16 inches on center.” He stated the continuous load path had been utilized. He concluded by stating the associations would like to see some language that would exempt Palm Beach County or exempt the homes built to a very high standard. He added he had provided to the chair and the secretary a letter from that board requesting the recognition of the use of the Standard Building Code in certain areas throughout Florida which are clearly at the forefront of addressing these wind issues.
Mr. Lecky then stated, as a representative of the town of Jupiter, he brought the Standard Building Code 1987. He stated in the back of the document it contained 1 and 2 family dwelling requirements for walls in Hurricane force winds from the Code Congress International published in 1984. He continued by stating the committee was chaired by Charlie Omelia in 1982. He stated from that document in 1990 came the Southern Building Code, deemed to comply manual which provided wind engineering more than adequate to meet the intent of this legislation. He reiterated he did not want the structural roofs of all the community damaged in this way because there are so many other mitigation things that could be used related to opening protectives, etc. He then stated he also brought a copy of a plan 1987 which shows continuous loads meeting or exceeding the recommendation on this rule-making.
Tim Reinhold, Institute for Business and Home Safety
Mr. Reinhold echoed support to obtaining time to go through the cycle and determine if the rule can be improved, workable and eliminate issues already raised. He stated there had been a couple of individuals who put together a strawman document and the information was reviewed in a workshop set up after the last TAC meeting. He added although a lot of input was brought to the workshop, none of those public comments have been integrated into any of the language. He further stated the whole point of hearing public comment would be useless if the original strawman is adopted without any of the benefit of going through any cycle at all. He then stated staff was given a revised document that incorporated a lot of the input that was heard at that workshop. He noted the document needed additional work, but he would support any effort brought to get the Legislature to postpone the implementation date.
Jack Glenn, Homebuilder’s Association
Mr. Glenn offered support of Dr. Reinhold’s remarks. He stated one of the association members, Richard Reynolds, worked a tremendous amount of voluntary time working with IBHS and developing the strawman delivered to the public hearing in Tampa which was well-attended. He then stated the unfortunate part, because of the time frames was it was a wasted public hearing because none of the comments were posted in the rule.
Mr. Blair stated the following three editorial changes in the document were recommended by staff: 1) a Section 101, reference listed Section 553.84, but should say Section 553.844; 2) Section 201.1 the last line should reference the existing building code, not the building code; 3) Section 201.3, second line should clarify 511.4 is in the existing building code. He stated the changes are strictly editorial and the motion would need to include those editorial changes.
Mr. Richmond closed the workshop. He then stated the motion to move forward with adoption of editorial changes noted by Mr. Blair or any other combination of the changes referred to by the proponents in the audience. He reminded the Commission integration other than editorial would put the Commission in the context of moving beyond the October 1st.
Mr. Blair stated the three changes he read would not require notice of change and rule adoption could move forward with the integration of the changes.
Mr. Richmond stated a notice of change would have to be published, but with changes being editorial, the notice could be posted and then filed.
Commissioner Wiggins noted on 201.1, the last 2 columns were exactly the same and asked if they should be combined into one column.
Mr. Madani stated each one has a different windspeed.
Commissioner Wiggins stated he did see footnote a and b and he asked if that was the only change.
Mr. Dixon stated the last two columns have different windspeeds.
Commissioner Wiggins stated he realized the different windspeeds, but the requirements were the same except for footnote b.
Mr. Blair asked Mr. Richmond to clarify the correct motion.
Mr. Richmond stated the motion would be to proceed with adoption as written, proceed with adoption noticing the 3 editorial changes identified or proceed with adoption by filing a notice of change with any number of the identified substantive changes.
Mr. Blair stated if a motion was made to file a notice of change with any substantive changes the Commission would not meet the deadline of October 1st.
Mr. Dixon stated this was one of the issues staff researched both legally and politically. He then stated the recommendation was to proceed in a manner which complies with what the Legislature had directed, while at the same time trying to work with industry to see if the Legislature cannot or will not give additional time to refine these requirements and make them better.
Commissioner Greiner expressed concern with the way the Legislature has instructed the Commission to do this mitigation process and if those are to be made during the glitch cycle, which makes the Code become effective October 1, 2008, there is a one year span that is unacceptable with what the mitigation requires in terms of Commission action.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the committee recommendation for rule adoption, accepting the editorial changes and indicating work to be done with the industry; and notification to the Legislature from the Commission stating while the Commission is trying to comply, more time is needed to make it happen, and ask the Legislature to allow the Commission to make it effective by October 1, 2008, along with the code process, allowing the changes necessary to be done during the glitch cycle.
Mr. Blair asked Commissioner Greiner to clarify the motion as follows to proceed with Rule Adoption for Rule 9B-3.0475 with the additional three editorial changes with the request from the Legislature for an implementation date of October 1, 2008, to allow time to correct changes necessary in the glitch cycle.
Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Mr. Dixon asked Commissioner Greiner to consider making the motion into two motions for clarity of the record. He stated one would be on the rule and one on what the Commission proceeds with in going to the Legislature asking for delay of implementation date.
Mr. Blair stated the first motion would be to proceed with rule adoption for Rule 9B-3.0475, Wind Mitigation, integrating the three editorial changes and publishing and filing the rule.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval of rule adoption and included editorial changes. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
Commissioner Kim stated he did not like any of the options staff has recommended, in terms of mandating the Commission to adopt the proposed rule which was not ready to be implemented. He continued by stating the choice to adopt the rule, have it implemented for almost one year which is not practical, cannot be implemented, nor executed, then in the interim try to fix it, does not appeal to him. He stated he was not sure how he would vote on the motion.
Chairman Rodriguez asked Mr. Richmond if the Commission had the power to resist or must it do what the Legislature mandates.
Mr. Richmond stated there was no penalty attached to the deadline. He further stated the penalty would be potential retribution for failing to concede to the desires of the Legislature which can be severe and swift.
Mr. Dixon offered clarification stating in the discussions he has heard regarding problems with the requirements, people were not concerned with nailing of decking, already required by the Code. The secondary water barrier, although a better job could be done specifying products, is something roofers have been doing for a while for their customers to receive credits on their insurance policies. Gable end bracing, is not mandatory by law, but the Commission was directed to provide techniques by rule so persons wanting to do this retrofit had something to go by instead of the building department requiring engineering. He stated the one mitigation item out of those required by law causing concern is the roof to wall connection requirement. He explained what the Commission does or does not do will not delay the requirements going into effect October 1, 2007. The mitigation requirements are established by law and will take effect whether techniques were provided or not. He then stated the one item not thought enough before it was put into law was the roof to wall connection enhancement when a roof is replaced. He noted this was the one with the 15% Mr. Cone had discussed, the one that jacks up the prices on an individual trying to keep their home when the roof is falling in, but more money is required than what they have or can get a loan for.
Commissioner Greiner stated after hearing comments from Mr. Richmond and Commissioner Kim he would like to take back his agreement to make two motions and have the original motion stand. He further stated he felt all of this should be done at one time, not separately.
Mr. Blair restated the motion to proceed with rule adoption, integrating the three editorial changes, then recommending to the Legislature to delay implementation until October 1, 2008.
Chairman Rodriguez asked if the Legislature should be given a reason why.
Commissioner Greiner responded yes because the Commission needs to have the ability to make the necessary changes to make this work in the glitch cycle, which is in place for these issues.
Chairman Rodriguez asked Mr. Richmond for the best way to proceed.
Mr. Richmond stated the motion accomplishes the intent to have the ability to make changes, together with the means for implementing the motion, which would basically be to go ahead and publish the notice of editorial change.
Commissioner Wiggins stated he accepted going back to the original motion, but added a further amendment to the motion to read into the record some of the issues related to the law that were vague or problematic and should be made of record and of notice to the Legislature as toward a solution. He continued by stating there were licensing issues in the statute that have created problems with regard to who would do what with regard to corrective action on the home that needs to be made for mitigation purposes; permitting issues in the law that are created; liabilities created for owners and for the roofing industry; inspection issues that are created within the law that are problematic; assumption of non-compliance for all three Florida Building Code homes in the state of Florida; basic flaw in protection afforded by this legislation that says by doing this retrofit, providing roof to wall connections, additional fastenings and bringing roof envelope up to Code it is providing wind compliance, what about sole plate and bottom plate connections, so the roof would be attached but could blow off at the bottom plates. He reiterated there are basic flaws in this legislation.
Mr. Blair stated it seemed like most of Commissioner Wiggins’ concerns were listed in the matrix. He asked if the choice would be to include the list of public comments for review by the Legislature and organize them in such a way to make those points clear.
Commissioner Wiggins stated the most important one is an arbitrary determination that homes built prior to the 2001 Building Code do not comply with any standard, He further stated this does not provide a comprehensive solution. He then stated what should be done on the positive side would be to develop a comprehensive solution that will actually work as far as mitigation.
Commissioner Schulte stated he was not sure if the Commission should be taking the lead on this rule. He further stated it was his industry who is most affected by this law and the association representing his industry supports it moving forward. He asked if the Commission shouldn’t support the industry with moving forward.
Commissioner Bassett asked if October 1st is not met would the Commission be the first to not meet a deadline. He then offered support to the motion entered by Commissioner Wiggins. He stated his wife is a retired claims manager and he was aware of one case in South Florida in Country Walk where the roof and the tie-beam blew off together. He noted tying the roof to the tie-beam does not necessarily make the house any safer.
Commissioner Greiner accepted Commission Wiggins amendments as stated. He also stated with respect to Commissioner Schulte he agreed it should be done in unison with the Commission supporting the industry, while also speaking for itself.
Mr. Blair restated the motion to move forward with rule adoption for Rule 9B-3.0475, Wind Mitigation Retrofits with the publication for notice of three editorial changes, with the Commission recommending a delay in the implementation date for this rule to be October 1, 2008, and to provide the list of comments read by Commissioner Wiggins, which are included in the matrix for reasons why further development of this should take place and implement through the glitch cycle.
Commissioner Sanidas stated the document should not state it was not good. He stated the main thing is the roofers will support the Commission if it gives them something they can use. He further stated if it can get into place and it works does it matter if it meets the Commission’s big thoughts or if the engineers love it or not. He then stated it hasn’t been right yet, as it has been changing the last 30 years. He concluded by stating the main thing now is to give them something right now that can be adopted, let them use it, don’t throw in short comings or people will use it against them. He stated if the industry supports the Commission, go with it and if it needs to be amended later, it will be handled as it always has been. He noted this country did not build log cabins with a code book and it worked.
Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
RULE DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP ON RULE 9B-3.0477, ELECTRICAL BONDING OF POOL DECKS
Chairman Rodriguez stated at the June 2007 meeting, the Commission conducted a rule development workshop on electrical bonding of pool decks in order to implement the 2007 Legislative direction regarding this issue. He further stated the hearing of the August 2007 meeting was the final step in the rule adoption process.
Mr. Richmond opened the rule development workshop. He then stated a procedural note the language comes from the draft of the National Electrical Code, although he was not sure of the current status. He continued by stating because it was in draft format the language was basically moved in its entirety to the Florida Administrative Code. He stated the move resulted in some changing in paragraph numbering. He further stated it had been reviewed and should be an accurate reflection of the National Electrical Code’s requirements. He concluded by stating all had been done with the express written permission of the NFPA.
Chairman Rodriguez opened for public comment. No one approached for comment.
Mr. Richmond closed the rule development workshop.
Mr. Richmond stated as there was no public comment a motion would be necessary to proceed with the filing of the rule.
Commissioner McCombs moved approval of the motion to proceed with rule adoption by filing the rule. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
RULE DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP ON RULE 9B-3.047, FLORIDA BUILDING CODE
Chairman Rodriguez reiterated his earlier statement that the Building Code Rule final changes must be completed at this meeting in order to meet the publication schedule of January 1, 2008 and the implementation schedule of October 1, 2008. He then stated at the June 2007 meeting the Commission concluded a rule development workshop on Rule 9B-3.047 and after deciding on the TAC’s recommendations for modifications to the Code, the Commission moved to proceed with rule adoption integrating the Commission’s draft rule. He further stated this hearing of Rule 9B-3.047 is the next step in the Commission’s consideration of proposed modifications to the 2007 update to the Florida Building Code. He stated the 2007 update process had been an exhaustive process beginning with the posting of proposed modifications to the Code for at least 45 days, followed by an extensive TAC review and recommendation process conducted in March 2007 where extensive public comment was considered by the TACs. He further stated the Commission has discussed every modification the public requested and reevaluated them prior to voting on the package of modifications of the Code. He concluded by stating there had been extensive discussion and the TAC and Commission level and any further changes should only be made of only absolutely essential.
Mr. Richmond opened the rule development workshop.
Chairman Rodriguez opened for public comment.
Michael Hoover, Scott and Goebel Architects, Tulsa, Oklahoma
Mr. Hoover stated he had an eleventh hour proposed code change and would like to be heard and state his case. He then stated his firm works with various national retail clients such as Lowe’s, Wal-Mart, Cole’s Department Store and Sports Authority in Florida. He stated some of their clients have started to construct their buildings in more urbanized areas in Florida resulting in the need to occupy a two story building instead of the standard one story building. He continued by stating because of that an issue was raised in their firm, and probably other firms working with clients in Florida have dealt with before. He stated currently the 2004 edition of the Florida Building Code, as well as the 2007 draft version of the Code, omits language in Chapter 5, General Building Heights in Areas, Section 507.3 in the 2004 version and Section 507.4 in the 2007 version which would allow a fully sprinklered two story building when limited area for group b,f,m, or s occupancy types. He stated the language was included in both the 2003 and 2006 versions of the International Building Code, on which the Florida Building Code is based. He continued by stating his firm felt provisions should be included to allow for a fully sprinklered two story building of unlimited area since the Code currently grants this unlimited area for fully sprinklered one story building and a fully sprinklered three story anchor building attached to a covered mall. He stated they felt a two story building would be less of a hazard than three story building of the same construction type of fire sprinkler system. He concluded by stating they respectfully submit a proposed modification to the Florida Building Code as described in the attachment. He added they realize comments were past deadline for submission for proposed code change, but the issue was not raised for the firm until the deadline had already passed. He stated they would greatly appreciate the Commission’s consideration of the proposed change for inclusion in the upcoming 2007 edition of the Florida Building Code.
Commissioner Rodriguez stated the glitch amendment process coming up would probably be where the Commission could address the request.
Joe Belcher, JDB Code Services
Mr. Belcher stated he had a number of public comments based on the Draft 2, online version which included corrections or things that were missing in Draft 2. He continued by stating he had been working with staff and most had been corrected in Draft 2. He concluded by stating he wanted to point out everything was editorial and no changes to the Code itself. He stated he would be available if anyone had any questions.
Terry Waterson, Pool Safety Consortium
Mr. Waterson stated objections were filed with the Commission and wanted to make sure they were part of the record.
Mr. Richmond stated copies had been given copies to Mr. Madani and are also linked through the system if anyone would like to review them.
Mr. Waterson stated their objection was to proposed changes listed in modifications 2704-2709. He further stated they seek the deletion of those modifications relating to pool safety from the proposed Building Code, leaving the Building Code the way it was. He continued by stating there had been a lot of news coverage because of some very unfortunate injuries to children lately. He cited cases including the death of a six year old in Connecticut due to pool suction whose arm was caught in the intake, as he had pried open the protective grating at the suction intake, and before power could be shut off the child drowned; the case of the little girl in Minnesota who had her intestines sucked out in a pool spa from a drain floating nearby. He stated the current code, not modified, incorporates the tried and true IRC and IBC language and the current codes require only devices that have been independently third party tested. He then stated the proposed modifications are wholesale modifications of the existing Building Code which provides for tertiary methods of pool safety as it relates to the suction apparatus. He continued by stating the current code modifications would substitute cheaper, more dangerous, less tested devices to be utilized and the current modification language would allow local governments to make determinations as to other devices not yet known that would accomplish the purpose of pool safety. He further stated the IBC and IRC had taken positions in opposition to this as they have adopted language with those protections currently in the existing code. He stated the proposal made by the pool contractor industry just allows less cost in construction and cheaper methods to be utilized in pool devices. He referenced the change in 2708 stating there was almost an entire deletion of the existing language, language that had been adopted by the Florida Building Commission, and language which is consistent with national organizations’ recommendations and proposals for pool safety. He stated the modification 2708 submitted by the Florida Swimming Pool Association essentially deletes all language this Commission initially adopted as necessary for the protection of Florida residents in pools. He then referenced modification 2709 stating it was also a deletion of language this Commission initially adopted. He concluded by stating this was not the time to be changing the IBC provisions adopted earlier and instead adopt cheaper protections and devices urged by the swimming pool contractors and manufacturers organization. He stated in this process there is no record throughout entire process that there are any Florida specific reasons have been provided for changes to the existing code, which a finding would be necessary to change from the existing code. He stated in the amendment process standards or criteria already previously adopted in the Florida Building Code for pool safety with respect to those criteria to the extent that there needs to be any amplification or modification of the criteria is already expressed. He then stated this was not amplification or modification or a Florida specific amendment of the Code with respect to the pool safety. He concluded by stating this was a complete and total change and an elimination of the devices previously determined by the Florida Building Commission as necessary for Florida resident protection in pools. He stated a document has been filed and it is available for the Commission’s review. He stated he would like to conclude by stating the standards rule exempt pools in commercial water parks. He added it was something attempted to change through ICC provisions on four different occasions and has been rejected. He stated it would be passed here in Florida by way of these modifications. He then added on August 1, 2007 the United States Consumer Products Safety Commission released its updated list of the Top 5 Household Hazards and included in that top 5 was pool and spa drainage entrapment. He noted this was added because of the recent number of children caught and trapped by the suction of pool and spa drains, between 1990 and 2005, 130 people were trapped and 27 of those people died as a result of entrapment. He stated the Consortium requests the Commission not adopt, but reject the modifications to the Florida Building Code expressed in 2704-2709. He stated if that were accomplished and the Commission had the authority to do that, the Code will remain as it was, compliant with IBC and IRC. He then stated if the proponents of these modifications wish to present additional information at some time when the Code is available for more than just amplification and modification, at a time when Florida specific reasons can be provided for Florida specific reasons for code modification they could do so, but not today. He concluded by stating in 2007, with circumstance as they exist in this country there is almost unanimous opposition to the kind of modifications proposed.
Jennifer Hatfield, Florida Swimming Pool Association
Ms. Hatfield stated she did not want to take up much of the Commission’s time as there had been extensive discussions in great detail at March TAC meeting as well as the August Commission meeting. She stated she wanted to address a few things Mr. Waterson discussed. She stated first there was no technical data that refuted the ANSI 7 Standard, passed by the Commission in August, which is a nationally approved standard. She then stated all necessary requirements were met at the TAC meeting in March. She further stated the requirement is Florida specific, language initiated in Florida before the ICC even had language, which in her opinion makes it Florida specific especially with the large number of pools in Florida. She stated now, as common practice would be, the language is being replaced with national standard now that there is a national standard. She continued by stating while the incidents like the one in Minnesota and other states are tragic and the association is concerned about those, the pools involved were not built in accordance with the ANSI standards passed. She noted the Minnesota pool was a commercial pool with a single drain system with direct suction, which is not currently allowed in Florida. She concluded stating the accidents were tragic and the Florida Swimming Pool Association had been in Washington, D.C. recently working with national and federal legislation in hopes to improve this in other states. She reiterated she believed what the Commission was doing at this meeting was great and she would be available for any additional questions or concerns there may be, but she would not rehash what has been discussed in previous meetings.
Wally Grant, Florida Roof Deck Association
Mr. Grant stated he missed the June meeting, but back in March there was a code modification 2383 that was approved by the TAC, but it does not appear on this agenda. He asked if since it is not on the agenda, does that mean it was previously voted off and he might just not be aware of it or if it was just an oversight.
Mr. Madani stated this was not an oversight. He stated it went through the hearing and the code changes in June and he could find it in the record. He stated at this point it was more refinements.
Mr. Blair stated for the record any motion the Commission makes would include comments referenced in matrix of public comments received since June meeting and staff’s recommendations, including approvals, for those particular items would be included in the motion, as well.
Mr. Richmond closed the hearing. He then stated the motion needed would be a motion to proceed with a notice of proposed change that incorporates those staff had recommended for approval and if any additional changes were to be identified with additional changes. He continued stating an additional element was procedural in nature, because of the objection filed by the Pool Safety Consortium, and could be construed as a characterization that the proceeding before the Commission fails to provide for the protection of the Consortium’s substantial interests. He stated he would ask the Commission’s motion specifically reject that claim whether or not their proposed amendments are integrated. He reiterated because it was procedural in nature it was right to be rejected because of the processes in place to ensure full and fair opportunity to participate. He further stated in this instance it was noted on the record of the workshop and the chief complainant, Mr. Pennington, who is affiliated with the Consortium, failed to participate in the written comment portion preceding the TAC meeting in March and as well at the March TAC meeting. He then stated the cancellation of the May TAC meeting was strictly procedural and the comment he made failed to meet the criteria for TAC consideration in May. He explained all of that information is available in the record to avoid the potential for multiple challenges, one of which could be in circuit court. He reiterated the Commission should reject the procedural claim by motion.
Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the motion as stated. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion.
Mr. Blair asked for clarification the motion should also include proceeding with rule adoption with implementation date of October 1, 2008 and without a hearing.
Mr. Richmond responded that was correct.
Commissioner Sanidas asked if the request were to reduce the requirements or pools.
Commissioner Browdy stated he believed the request was just the opposite.
Commissioner Sanidas stated the Consortium was, but he meant the amendments are reducing the requirements of the pool.
Chairman Rodriguez responded the amendments are not reducing the requirements of the pools.
Commissioner Sanidas stated as long as the requirements for pools are not being reduced he has no problem with moving forward.
Commissioner Vann stated, as the Chairman of the Plumbing TAC, for the record he wanted to clarify a few things. He first stated these issues have been discussed ad nauseam for months and months. He further stated everyone had an opportunity to speak at every meeting held; no one has ever been shut down. He stated those associations against the rule have done an excellent job of appearing at the last minute, last meeting and at the last minute at this meeting to cloud the issue. He then stated the Commission’s Plumbing TAC voted 10-1 supporting the ANSI 7 standards. He noted this has been long since put to bed and the opponents keep bringing it back up again and again to sell a product. He concluded by stating there were multiple redundant protections in pool systems that have been improved.
Commissioner Bassett stated the process would be if someone thought it was weakening the process they should file a glitch amendment and go through that process to bring it up because it is a safety issue. He then stated he believed the Commission should go ahead and approve what is before them at this meeting.
Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.
COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS AND ISSUES
Commissioner Bassett stated relative to carbon monoxide detectors, he believed they belong in the building code section itself, not the mechanical code or electrical code. He stated he believed it should be a definition added in Chapter 2 and the definition added in Chapter 9 which is alarms and fire protection systems, and the main text should be added in 908.7. He concluded by stating it should be the Building Fire or Structural TACs that should be reviewing those during the glitch cycle.
Mr. Madani agreed stating it should be corrected in glitch cycle.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Jack Glenn, Homebuilder’s Association
Mr. Glenn stated during the comment on the mitigation rule there was some discussion regarding supporting an opportunity with the Legislature to delay the implementation until the rule can be better refined. He then stated as a member of the Construction Coalition he informed the Commission it is their intent to attempt to get mitigation added to the call for the Special Session. He further stated he would not only encourage but also thanked the Commission for that recommendation, which he believed would go a long way in getting those changes made.
REVIEW COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS AND ISSUES FOR OCTOBER 1, 2 AND 3, 2007 MEETING
Mr. Blair stated the next Commission meeting is October 1-3, 2007, in Tampa, changed from previous dates. He stated there was no need to go through the various TACs because if there were declaratory statements they would meet unless there was something any Commissioner wanted to add now.
ADJOURN
Commissioner Rodriguez adjourned the Florida Building Commission meeting at 4:45pm.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- nevada corporation commission entity s
- new york life commission structure
- securities and exchange commission filings
- joint commission time out requirements
- joint commission time out policy
- joint commission survey prep questions
- joint commission preparation checklist 2018
- joint commission cheat sheet
- nevada corporation commission name search
- civil service commission new york
- joint commission standards time out
- joint commission surgical time out