Legislature(2009 - 2010)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/02/2010 01:30 PM Senate LABOR & COMMERCE
Audio | Topic |
---|---|
Start | |
SB117 | |
SB279 | |
SB258 | |
SB129 | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+= | SB 279 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | SB 258 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | SB 129 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
= | SB 117 | ||
SB 129-RESIDENTIAL SPRINKLER SYSTEMS 2:41:45 PM CHAIR PASKVAN announced SB 129 to be up for consideration. He said a lot of work was done on this bill in the past year. He moved to bring CSSB 129(), version M, before the committee. There were no objections and it was so ordered. 2:42:58 PM SENATOR LINDA MENARD, sponsor of SB 129, said the committee substitute (CS) was a result of listening to the pros and cons of this issue while adhering to what she believed needs to happen. She said the CS is a compromise. She said that she is not opposed to sprinkler systems being required in homes, but she does believe that requiring residents to install sprinkler systems in the building code needs a more robust hearing. SENATOR MENARD said the CS removes all references to the state, state agencies, and state corporations, because Alaska has no statewide building code. The CS retains local control while setting in statute an elongated public process. Along with preparing a cost benefit analysis, this bill calls for local governments to post notice at least 30 days before their first public hearing, schedule at least three public hearings on a proposed ordinance or amendment to be held within a 60-day period and not consider the proposed ordinance or amendment for adoption sooner than 60 days after conclusion of the first public meeting. It is no surprise that the firefighters would be against this bill. Respectfully, she said, it is their job to do all they can to protect the life and property of Alaskans, but she argued that the CS retains local control and gives local decision makers the option of mandating sprinklers. SENATOR MENARD argued that those opposed to the bill would say this bill puts an unfunded mandate on cities and municipalities, but the unfunded mandate is really being put on homeowners. Plus a local government can choose to spend as little or as much as it wants to on the required cost benefit analysis. SENATOR MENARD said the cost benefit analysis language in this bill is very broad simply requiring local governments to prepare a cost benefit analysis as to how expensive or inexpensive a proposal may be. 2:46:11 PM She said the reason for the expanded public process is that adopting a code requiring fire sprinkler systems for one to two family dwellings is not a "run-of-the-mill" code item. It is an expensive system that has proven impacts on the cost of a home. It is especially costly for those on well systems, which almost a third of Alaskans are on. Anchorage Mayor Sullivan said he thinks the extra public process is appropriate for fire sprinklers in one or two family dwellings because installing them in Alaska's cold climate is complex. SENATOR MENARD said she didn't dispute the potential life and property savings quality of sprinkler system and realized there are situations where mandating sprinklers in a new home would seem to make sense, but her point with the CS was that the public who will be the one to pay for the system will have ample time for testimony, discussion and education if the issue arises. She said SB 129 has a zero fiscal note. 2:49:04 PM JEFF TUCKER, President, Alaska Fire Chiefs Association, Fairbanks, said a public process is already in place that has worked well for all public code procedures. There is no need for a special process for just one issue. 2:51:18 PM WALLY SMITH, President, Alaska State Homebuilders Association, deferred his testimony to the Interior Alaska Building Association. 2:52:00 PM DAVE MILLER, President, Interior Alaska Homebuilders Association, Fairbanks, said this bill is a reasonable and intelligent compromise that provides time for local building officials, legislators and voters to consider the consequences of mandating sprinklers in single family homes in Alaska. He encouraged the committee to pass SB 129. SENATOR MEYER asked what it costs to install a sprinkler system in an average size house. MR. MILLER answered anywhere from $2-8 square foot. SENATOR MEYER took the middle, $5, and said an average house is 1500-2000 square feet; so this would add substantial cost on to a new home and the builder would just pass it on to the consumer. MR. MILLER responded that consumers right now are having a hard time buying homes without having an additional $7500 added to their cost. Appraisers aren't even "getting value" for that, so consumers would have to pay for this cost out of pocket. Also, he said, it's almost impossible to say how much a real functioning system in homes with well systems would cost to install. Their job as builders is to provide safe and affordable housing for Alaskans and mandating sprinklers would put a large number of people where they couldn't afford to build a home. The Homebuilders encourage life safety things like smoke detectors that are a better value for homebuyers. SENATOR MEYER asked if sprinklers are susceptible to freezing up in the winter. MR. MILLER replied that it would depend on the type of system, but water systems are susceptible to freezing in Alaska and Minnesota. He had even read a report that said some insurance companies were not providing a discount for having a sprinkler system because of some water loss issues with systems going off. Maintenance of these systems is another issue. SENATOR MEYER asked how often sprinkler systems need to be maintained. MR. MILLER replied that most would recommend an annual inspection. 2:59:43 PM ERIC MOHRMANN, Fire Chief, Capital City Fire Rescue, Juneau, said the City and Borough of Juneau (CBJ), like 17 other jurisdictions across the state of Alaska, is a deferred jurisdiction. This means that the State Fire Marshall's Office has looked at their code adoption process and their capabilities and has decided that they not only meet the minimum enforcement requirements of the state fire and building codes, but that they exceed them. He said the local jurisdictions had spent quite a bit of money to provide citizens with good quality code plan review, enforcement and adoption. 3:01:25 PM He explained that the City and Borough of Juneau has a rigorous process for adopting codes; the Assembly appoints a five-person committee to review the codes in detail, line-by-line, over a two-and-a-half year period. In Juneau's case, this committee consists of an architect, an electrical engineer, a civil engineer, a mechanical engineer and a contractor. They meet regularly in public meetings which are publicized over a two- and-a-half year period and look at the building, fire and residential codes (the one in question here). They make amendments and modifications to those codes to meet the local jurisdictional needs. By law, they are not allowed to make a code requirement or a code change that is less stringent than the state's, but they are allowed to have ones that are more stringent. After numerous public meetings, which are publicized and open to the public, their recommendations are turned over to the Assembly Public Works Committee. This committee reviews the recommendations in detail in publicized open public meetings and then forms a recommendation that is forwarded on to the full Assembly. The full Assembly, in public open publicized meetings, presents these recommendations through two public hearings which span one month. He said the state of Alaska does not enforce nor has it adopted the 2009 International Residential Code, the code that has specifications for residential sprinklers for one and two-family dwellings. The state doesn't even address it. Only local deferred jurisdictions and home rule communities can look at this code and decide on their own whether they are going to adopt the provisions or not. He said that the City and Borough of Juneau had adopted the International Residential Code for 2003 and modified the 2006 version that requires sprinklers in one and two-family dwellings, because that would not be appropriate at this time. MR. MOHRMANN explained that when the 2009 codes comes up for review, the committee, the Assembly Committee, the Assembly, and the public can all have their say and decide whether they want that option or not. 3:04:28 PM MR. MOHRMANN said this bill addresses one issue only - residential sprinklers - and emphasized: There is no more effective way to protect our citizens from fire than one and two-family residential sprinklers. Seventy-eight percent of fires occur in one and two-family dwellings. Eighty percent of the civilian fire deaths, 84 percent of the civilian fire injuries occur in one and two-family dwellings. Where should we be addressing our fire resources to solving the problem? It seems to make sense to me. But regardless of that, he said, the code review committees look at a variety of things - how many toilets a building has to have, how many egress windows, electrical ground fault interrupter circuits, and smoke detectors - thousands of items. They all have financial impacts, so why single out this one item to go through a different process? MR. MOHRMANN stated that right now a triplex or four-plex within Juneau is required by the code to have a sprinkler system, but the State of Alaska has not made that requirement until one has more than 16 residential units. MR. MOHRMANN said that it was mentioned that sprinklers will not work off of a well, but he has installed three residential sprinkler systems in his own homes, one by contractor and two by himself. His cost was $1200-$1500 per system, and two of them were off of wells and they do work. You need a water tank and an electric pump. "It's not rocket science." They didn't freeze up and these were all done in Fairbanks. These systems were given breaks by insurance companies; he said state law says you get a 2 percent reduction in your local taxes if you have a residential sprinkler system installed. It won't pay for the whole thing, but it helps, and insurance companies recognize the value. The history behind residential sprinkler systems is that they have been phenomenally effective, he concluded, and they cost about 3 percent of new construction using the excessive estimate of $5 sq. ft. Bottom line, though, these systems are very effective at saving lives 3:08:53 PM SENATOR MEYER asked if the sprinkler heads are sensitive to kids throwing balls, for instance. CHIEF MOHRMANN replied that he had three kids in each one of his houses with the same type of heads, but the ball never hit them. Mechanically they are very reliable and don't have a record of having many accidental activations from getting struck by something. Statistics show that sprinkler head spontaneously fail less than one in a million. SENATOR MEYER asked what annual maintenance is required. MR. MOHRMANN answered that an NFPA 13-R system, which is designed for triplexes and larger and commercial applications, requires an annual inspection in the form of a report that is turned into the local fire department. The fire code does not apply in the case of one and two-family dwellings, but the International Residential Code does. He didn't believe it had a requirement for annual inspections. SENATOR MEYER remarked that he is not required to have his furnace checked annually, but he wants to do it. He would probably want to do that with a sprinkler system. MR. MOHRMANN answered yes; most residential systems (wet systems) are filled with water all the time. They are very simple. It will come off the meter, have an indicating valve, a little backflow preventer valve, and a pressure gauge. You check to see if the valve is open and if it has pressure. That's about it. The fire department is more than happy to answer questions about them. 3:12:07 PM SENATOR DAVIS asked if he was speaking to the CS or the original bill. MR. MOHRMANN responded that he was trying to demonstrate that the established local process is already very vigorous and is used for thousands and thousands of other items; injecting this requirement for one and two-family dwellings is excessive and not necessary. He opposed the CS for the same reason - because what it requires is already being done. SENATOR DAVIS asked why he opposed the bill since it didn't mandate sprinkler systems. MR. MOHRMANN answered that a triplex is regulated under the International Building Code; a one and two-family dwelling is regulated under the International Residential Code. Both of those are scrutinized under the local code adoption process for that deferred jurisdiction. It is already a very rigorous process, and the reason for his opposition to the CS is that it injects additional steps that are unnecessary. SENATOR DAVIS asked if something could be changed in the bill that would allow him to support it. MR. MOHRMANN replied, "To be honest with you, at this point, there is already under - I believe it's AS 29.25 - specific directions in regards to how meetings are supposed to be held...and code adoption falls within that." The local jurisdictions have to follow those by law, so that makes the CS superfluous. It's merely an effort to make adopting residential sprinklers more onerous, he concluded. CHAIR PASKVAN said he was particularly focused on whether the percentage of structure fires and the percentage of civilian fire deaths occurring in residential structures were in triplexes or more as compared to duplexes or less. MR. MOHRMANN responded that this information came directly from the National Fire Protection Association and he would be happy to provide copies of that document to the committee. It was in reference to one and two-family dwellings. 3:16:56 PM JAMES HILL, Fire Chief, Ketchikan, Alaska, said the Ketchikan Fire Department and the City of Ketchikan both strongly opposed SB 129 because everyone knows the benefits of having a residential sprinkler system. He said back in the 60s and early 70s, 15,000 people a year were killed in fires; today it's less than 4,000. The codes were changed because people died. The most recently deferred jurisdictions in Alaska all have different fire and building code issues to deal with. He asked that the legislature leave fire and building code enforcement issues on a local level and not have state mandates that impede their ability to protect their communities. MR. HILL said that Ketchikan already has the Ketchikan Municipal Code that goes through the same process that Juneau does. Their process provides them the ability to work with people on issues that have been around since Ketchikan was formed. To take that away to have some kind of leverage with contractors, homeowners and professionals is wrong, he emphatically stated. For example, a local single family dwelling in Ketchikan sits atop a 26- percent grade that for all practical purposes he could not protect - at least with a fire truck to the front door. He also wasn't able to provide emergency medical services without having to walk there. It's in a "dandy spot" with probably the best view in town and was approved a couple of years ago. Now someone wants to build a neighboring house in the same vicinity, and he now has some leverage with those folks to have a standpipe put in between the homes instead of requiring a sprinkler system to go in the second house. It is a fixed fire system that would allow him to provide effective fire protection for both of the homes. CHAIR PASKVAN said he believed the CS is a local option bill, and he asked him what portion of the procedure is not appropriate. MR. HILL replied that he didn't believe it was inappropriate; it's just already being done on a local level and communities have different fire and building code issues to deal with. 3:21:46 PM CHAIR PASKVAN asked him to provide the statistics from 1970 that he referenced to the committee. MR. HILL responded that wouldn't be a problem. 3:21:59 PM DAVID SQUIRES, Fire Chief, Seward, Alaska, read a letter signed by the city manager opposing SB 129. It said as written SB 129 would infringe upon their rights as a home rule city and would limit the rights of their citizens to consider ways to reduce the cost of government. MR. SQUIRES said SB 129 would limit the ability of the municipality to consider options when planning forest fire protection. It also increases their administrative workload by increasing the number of public hearings for ordinance adoption. This bill does not consider what process each deferred jurisdiction already has in place for adopting building, fire or mechanical codes. This bill would severely impact the community of Seward because of existing ordinances concerning improvements for construction where they have used a sprinkler requirement as a way to reduce costs to developers. If this bill is passed, Mr. Squires said, it would drive up the cost for fire protection in Seward because of the need to require vehicles or a vehicle that would have the ability to truck in water, supplies and the cost of a building to house those vehicles. MR. SQUIRES pointed out that the state fire marshal indicated this bill would have no fiscal impact on the department, and that is true because the State of Alaska does not regulate this issue, but having certain items in place prior to adoption of an ordinance on sprinklers for residential structures would put an enormous financial impact on their community. He thanked Senator Menard for allowing time for the public process, but as a deferred jurisdiction that passes building, fire, mechanical, electrical codes and more, he said Seward already has that process in order and he had not received one complaint from any of the contractors or residents that have built houses within the City of Seward that their timelines for adopting new codes or making additions to codes is too short. He would like to hear if the proponents of this bill think they are not getting a fair hearing at any of the deferred jurisdictions, so they could fix those items. MR. SQUIRES commented on Mayor Sullivan's letter where he said this could be done on a case-by-case basis - this bill does not allow case-by-case; it would be a blanket ordinance. It would not be good for two houses that have different requirements 2000 feet apart; it could lead to a fairly large lawsuit. 3:26:44 PM JEFF FEID, Loss Mitigation Administrator, State Farm Insurance, opposed SB 129 as well as the CS. He said the total lives in cost of residential fires is enormous, and on behalf of their policy holders, State Farm must take all reasonable steps to reduce the 3000 national yearly deaths caused by them. It's beyond dispute that when properly installed, sprinklers save lives, protect property, and reduce the risk to firefighters. He said that State Farm provides premium discount for homes protected with fire sprinkler systems meeting nationally recognized standards. They have considered many studies that show the benefits of having fire sprinklers. One example is in Scottsdale, Arizona, that has had an ordinance for over 20 years. In the first 15 years the ordinance was in place, they had 598 home fires. Of those fires, 49 were in single family homes with sprinkler systems and no deaths occurred. In the homes that had fires without sprinkler systems, 13 people perished. Likewise, another 13 people who would have likely died without sprinklers were saved. The average fire loss for sprinklered incidents in Scottsdale is $2,166 in property damage compared to $45,000 for unsprinklered incidents. Significantly reduced water damage was also found because fires were suppressed with 341 gallons of water per fire in those homes with sprinkler systems versus the unsprinklered homes that used almost 3,000 gallons per home. MR. FEID related that the average cost to install a system in Scottsdale was 80 cents sq. ft. and the National Fire Protection Research Foundation has shown on a national average installation cost of $1.61 sq. ft. He noted that part of the Foundation project included participation from the National Association of Homebuilders as well as State Farm. CHAIR PASKVAN asked him to submit the data he relied upon. SENATOR MENARD reiterated that she is not against sprinkler systems, but she is for a more public process and opportunity. MICHAEL REVITO, aide to Senator Menard, additionally commented that a lot of speakers didn't address the actual CS which was about having a more robust public process. Some of the folks who spoke said a public process was already in place, and while that is true, statute says that local governments are required to notice only five days before public hearings begin. Since all the previous speakers seemed to support involving the public as much as possible, giving the public even more time to educate themselves and come forth with their opinions seemed reasonable. SB 129 was held in committee. 3:33:24 PM CHAIR PASKVAN thanked everyone for their testimony and adjourned the meeting at 3:33 p.m.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|---|---|
CS SB 129 Bill Packet.pdf |
SL&C 3/2/2010 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 129 |
SB 279 Bill Packet.pdf |
SL&C 3/2/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 279 |
SB 258 Bill Packet.pdf |
SL&C 3/2/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 258 |