Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/01/2004 01:37 PM Senate L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 377-STATE MECHANICAL CODE
CHAIR CON BUNDE announced SB 377 to be up for consideration for
its first hearing and that he didn't intend to move it today.
MR. ZACH WARWICK, staff to Senator Gene Therriault, sponsor,
said it is designed to solve a problem that arose in 2001 when
the Department of Public Safety (DPS) adopted a new brand of
building code for the State of Alaska.
The state has five codes for building construction: plumbing,
electrical, mechanical, building and fire. The Department of
Labor and Workforce Development (DOLWD) has the statutory
authority to adopt the mechanical and electrical codes; the DPS
by default has used the following statute to adopt the other
three codes. It states:
The Department of Public Safety may adopt regulations
for the purpose of protecting life and property from
fire and explosion by establishing minimum standards
for fire and safety criteria in commercial,
industrial, business, institutional or other public
buildings and buildings used for residential purposes
containing four or more dwelling units.
MR. WARWICK explained that when the DPS adopted the new codes,
which are different than the Uniform Codes, it was done under
the guise that if the new codes weren't adopted, the state would
lose Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) money. That was
a completely untrue statement. Mechanical contractors who are
the ones in the field doing the installations didn't have any
input on design or installation procedures; the code was
primarily designed by architects, engineers and building
officials.
Currently, a lawsuit before the Supreme Court of Alaska is
trying to revert back to the uniform family of codes. This bill
would solve that problem by removing all references to the
Uniform Mechanical Code.
CHAIR BUNDE said about 10 people wanted to testify and there
were about 11 minutes left and that another hearing would be
held at another time.
MR. EUGENE RUTLAND, Executive Director, Mechanical Contractors
of Alaska, supported SB 377. He explained that recently Alaska
adopted a Mechanical Code and a Plumbing Code that was published
by two different entities who did not coordinate their
publications with each other.
We need to have these codes under one agency where
they can be coordinated. The Department of Public
safety only performs mechanical and electrical plan
review for fire and life safety requirements. The
balance of the mechanical code is not enforced at this
time. The Department of Labor and Workforce
Development has field inspectors who physically
inspect actual installations. Since mechanical and
plumbing are so closely intertwined, these same
inspectors could and should inspect the mechanical
installation, also.
Finally, the owners of our member firms are licensed
mechanical administrators. They have both plumbing and
mechanical category endorsements on their licenses.
State statutes require them to sign off on each
project they are responsible for. This certifies that
the project has been solved in accordance with the
applicable mechanical or plumbing codes. The penalty
for violation ranges from a fine to a loss of
license.... We support the passage of SB 377.
MR. DOUG MATHERS, Building Official, City of Kodiak, opposed SB
377. His reasoning is in the fax he sent to the committee.
MR. GREG MOORE, Nana/Colt Engineering, said they are an oil and
gas engineering firm and opposed SB 377.
We oppose it because we haven't finished the business,
yet, of the Safety Codes Task Force. If we would
finish our business there, those items that we're
talking about in this bill would be taken care of....
We also oppose it because this bill only tries to
solve the problem for 477 mechanical administrators
that will be affected by this bill. There are 6,166
engineers, designers and residential builders that
will also be affected by this bill, except in a
negative way.
MR. COLIN MAYNARD, Alaska Professional Design Council (APDC),
opposed SB 377.
We believe that the process that the department of
Public Safety has used to adopt the mechanical code
for over 40 years has always been the same. The code
was written by The International Conference of
Building Officials (ICBO) that they have adopted for
the last 40 years. ICBO now, under the name of
International Code Council (ICC), has written the
International Mechanical Code that we're using, so
it's not a different code. It's the same people with
the same code.
MR. CRAIG FREDEEN, Mechanical Engineer, ASCG, Inc. opposed SB
377. He thought the code should stay in the Department of Public
Safety because it has a more open and public process.
MR. JEFF ROBINSON, Klebs Mechanical, Inc., opposed SB 377.
MS. EDEN LARSON, President, Associated Builders and Contractors,
(ABC), opposed SB 377.
MR. SAM KITO III, Alaska Professional Design Council (APDC),
said it represents over 5,000 design professionals in the State
of Alaska and opposed SB 377.
MR. CRAIG STEVENSON, Regional Manager, Governmental Relations
Office, ICC, said it is a nonprofit, public benefit corporation
whose history is in three former groups - one of them known as
ICBO. Although their process of code development is similar to
what ICBO used to do, it's much expanded and includes much more
industry in the decision making process. The Uniform Mechanical
Code that has been adopted by the State of Alaska was the ICBO
version and that is not promulgated and updated by them any
more; however, the assets of ICBO are owned by the ICC. His
organization helps facilitate a process for safety codes to be
used by local and state government. He suggested that SB 377 be
held for further investigation to see if it meets the spirit and
intent of AS 44.62, Administrative Procedures, and if it meets
the state's policy for public meetings. He opposes the bill on
the grounds that there hasn't been a complete inquiry into all
the organizations, their processes and what others have in terms
of providing solutions. Lastly, he noted faulty references on
page 1, lines 10, 11 and 13.
CHAIR BUNDE asked him to forward his comments in writing to the
committee. There being no further business to come before the
committee, he adjourned the meeting at 3:30 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|