August 21, 2006 minutes
|
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
|
Jim Sparkes, Bryan Wyatt, Kevin Chaney, Gary Mohr |
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS ABSENT: |
|
None |
|
|
|
|
|
GUEST PRESENT: |
|
Bill Schweitzer, IAPMO |
|
|
|
|
|
STAFF PRESENT:
EX-OFFICIO: |
|
None
Patrick O’Brien, Mechanical Inspector |
|
|
|
|
Meeting called to order at 6:38 p.m.
Wyatt stated that on page two when he had discussions with Rich Barr he wanted to make sure his discussion with Barr was reflected properly. He requested to add “Wyatt stated that he wanted to make sure the board had accurate information on the references, Barr then discovered there were in fact 66 references to the National Electrical Code”
Chaney made a motion to approve the minutes as changed. Seconded by Mohr, pass 4-0.
Discuss impacts of joint venture of ICC and IAPMO
Sparkes asked Bill Schweitzer when he thought ICC and IAPMO were going to get together. Schweitzer stated that there was a town hall meeting in Denver, CO and there were a large number of ICC members that were against the open consensus and the use of the UPC as a basis for the plumbing code. When the ICC board heard of the opposition to the joint venture, they started to back up on the progress. Schweitzer stated that he had contacted as many ICC members as he could to voice their support for the joint venture. ICC is stating that they don’t want to use an open consensus on the plumbing code even though they(IAPMO) has said they will use the ICC mechanical code as a base and use governmental consensus and use the IAPMO plumbing code as a base and use the open consensus form. Another concern that ICC had was that the IAPMO had 2/3rds on the plumbing committee and 50-50 on the mechanical committee. Schweitzer stated that the reason for the 50-50 on the mechanical is because the mechanical code was originally written by IAPMO in 1967. Also IAPMO had no voice on the IRC(International Residential Code) which included residential portions of the plumbing and mechanical codes. Schweitzer stated that if the codes combined, nothing will be published until 2009. Schweitzer is hoping that the codes do merge to eliminate all the adoption battles in jurisdictions. At this time, Schweitzer could not say whether the joint venture will go forward or not.
Wyatt asked who did not want to merge into one code. Schweitzer stated that ICC was not wanting to merge. Schweitzer stated that the town hall meeting was not publicized very well and the people that did show up were mostly against the joint merger.
Wyatt stated that he was hoping to hear that the joint venture was at least an 80% done deal because he was not looking forward to making all the amendments for the blended codes.
Schweitzer stated that he knows that ICC will say that IAPMO backed out, but he knows that IAPMO membership is going to vote for the joint venture at conference, so it will be in ICC’s court. IAPMO is committed to the joint venture to have one code for the nation.
Sparkes stated that he was asking because after having meetings with the city, he had gotten the impression that the joint venture was a done deal and that the board needed to move forward. He continued that he did not want to continue fighting over the Uniform and International codes and the joint venture would clear up the decisions that needed to be made. He still has the opinion that the UMC was still the best choice compared to ICC, even if amendments needed to be made.
Schweitzer stated that if he could say that it was an 80% done deal, then to move forward. But he could not say with that kind of accuracy.
Wyatt stated that he is not looking forward to making amendments to the code but also felt that the UMC had the more prescriptive code. Things have changed that it was difficult to just look at the mechanical code, that all the codes needed to be looked at concurrently. Wyatt would like to have assurances from ICC that the joint venture is still on before moving forward with any decisions are made by the board.
Chaney asked Mohr what the outlook from an engineer’s standpoint would be.
Mohr responded that he is not necessarily a supporter of the International codes but if that is the City’s direction then there will have to be a lot of work to reduce the amount of confusion all the references will make. From a design standpoint, it does not make a difference as long as everybody is on the same playing field. Mohr explained that he has a concern that it will be a difficult task to try and edit the International codes with the uniform codes and not create loopholes in the code. He hopes that it would not be as bad as it sounds.
Schweitzer stated that he was hoping to get the code adopted, but might be a good idea to wait to see what ICC will do. Wyatt and Chaney agreed.
Chaney mentioned a couple of concerns with the IMC pertaining to the board of appeals and the appeals process. Wyatt also stated that when the comparison of the IMC and the UMC was done side by side that the board had determined the UMC was the more prescriptive code. The UMC had a more democratic process. Staff reminded the board that the appeals process and the administrative portions have always been written locally by the Mechanical Board.
Wyatt suggested getting a statement from the ICC to determine what was going to happen with the joint venture. He also mentioned that in the past, the trades were able to work independently, now all the trades need to work together because they affect each other. It sounded to him like IAPMO is still willing to work on the joint venture but that ICC was beginning to back pedal.
Chaney stated that if ICC pulls out of the joint venture, he would be inclined to keep going the way they’ve been going. Wyatt agreed that if ICC and IAPMO don’t merge, then to stay the course, but to at least look at what the blending of the codes will impact. Sparkes stated that without the merger, that IAPMO is the way to go. Mohr explained that going with the UMC will require all the amendments from the various codes. Schweitzer stated that IAPMO can provide the necessary amendments. Staff reminded the board that any amendment made to a particular code must have the full section being amended in the ordinance. Mohr stated that the codes are so interrelated between disciplines that using a different code makes it more difficult. Wyatt stated that it would be a good idea to wait and see what ICC decides to do on the joint venture. Schweitzer stated that when the two codes merge, the gas sections will be in the newly formed IUMC(International Uniform Mechanical Code) so the mechanical contractors can still rely on one book.
Schweitzer assured the board they could get access to amendments for the 2003 UMC.
Mohr reminded the board that the UMC is not a stand alone code and will have to be integrated into the other codes.
Motion made by Chaney, seconded by Mohr to wait to hear from ICC on their position on the joint venture to proceed with the code review process. Pass 4-0.
Begin Discussion of International Fire Code References
Mohr made a motion to table the code discussion and wait on word from the joint venture. Seconded by Wyatt. Pass 4-0.
Miscellaneous
Motion to adjourn made by Wyatt, seconded by Chaney, passed 4-0. Meeting adjourned at 8:08 p.m.