August 20, 2007 minutes
|
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
|
Jim Sparkes, Bryan Wyatt, Gary Mohr, Kevin Chaney, Mark Jarboe |
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS ABSENT: |
|
None |
|
|
|
|
|
GUEST PRESENT: |
|
Bill Schweitzer, IAPMO; Luke Oehlert, Paul Oehlert, Jay Woodward, ICC; , Bobbie Flory, LHBA; Ron Durflinger |
|
|
|
|
|
STAFF PRESENT:
EX-OFFICIO: |
|
Tim Pinnick, Plan Review Manager
Patrick O’Brien, Mechanical Inspector |
|
|
|
|
Meeting called to order at 6:33 p.m.
After review, Mohr made a motion to approve the minutes as written. Seconded by Wyatt, pass 5-0.
Review changes discussed at July 30, 2007 meeting
Staff advised the board of the two proposed changes that were discussed. Both changes added language to require duct design prior to rough-in inspection the first option added the requirement of all submittals to be ASHRAE approved. Staff also informed the board that according to the energy code, the equipment sizing will be required at the time of permit application.
Mohr stated most computer based load calculation software is based on ASHRAE methodologies. He stated that he understood staff would be willing to review any proposed alternate methods concerning the load calculation methods.
Staff confirmed Mohr’s statement.
Bobbie Flory presented to the board a concept form the contractor would provide with each permit stating the contractor has designed and installed the system in compliance with “Manual J & D” or other approved method to be placed in the file. She stated the form may need to be added to in order to be acceptable, but should be a start in the right direction. With this document, if in the future there is a problem, the City can refer to the document and if the contractor can not produce the method he used, he would have to make the corrections necessary to fix the problem. She also stated she disagreed the energy code requires the information at permit application and would like to get confirmation from the ICC official on the requirement.
Chaney responded the only thing staff will require at permit is the equipment sizing but the ductwork sizing would be required at the rough-in.
Luke Oehlert asked if he would be required to do a load calculation on a furnace and air conditioner change out.
Chaney replied the requirement would only apply to new construction and remodels.
Luke Oehlert asked if there was going to be a requirement, then why not for changeouts also. His concern is the changeouts are a bigger problem compared to new construction because it is more difficult to determine the insulating values of an older home. As far as new construction is concerned, there is a tendency to try to keep costs low and he knows if he turns down a job, there is someone who will come in and do the installation for what the builder is willing to pay. He stated he will not install a system if he knows it will not perform properly.
Mohr replied what the board is trying to do is to get all contractors on a level playing field to stop the contractors that are willing to install an inferior system to try and lower costs. He stated the board is not changing the requirement in the code, the board is proposing to require the documentation be provided to the City for verification.
Ron Durflinger asked the board how many complaints has the board received where HVAC system performance has been an issue and not been resolved.
Chaney responded the board has not received complaints, he stated the issue typically gets resolved between the mechanical contractor and the homeowner.
Durflinger stated when there is an issue, he does involve the mechanical contractor because they are responsible for the work, but he is also involved because he will follow up to be sure the customer has been satisfied. He stated he wants to be sure the work that is being required is done in the most cost efficient way possible.
Chaney stated the board was attempting to reduce the practice of cutting corners on systems to win the bid from the next guy.
Durflinger has a concern requiring the paperwork at time of permit application.
Chaney replied the timing of the duct design was moved back to prior to rough in but the equipment sizing will be required at time of permit application.
Durflinger stated he has been told there is a significant amount of paperwork involved in calculating the equipment and duct system sizing. He suggested not requiring the calculations unless there were some extraordinary circumstances that may cause the system to under perform.
Luke Oehlert pointed out requiring the paperwork up front still will not solve the problem 100%. He stated it might help the problem but not completely.
Pinnick stated the codes other than the mechanical code are based on performance; the mechanical systems have many variables that make the sizing difficult.
Luke Oehlert stated most of the computer based load calculations will calculate the systems 5-10% shy of what most systems being installed simply because the contractor does not want to go back later and upsize the system based on their experience.
Chaney stated there was a form submitted by Wayne Duncan that he stated he liked but it needed more information.
Wyatt stated the board was asked to review the code and work out any issues that they saw as pertaining to the code and this is one of the things that the board decided to make an improvement to. There needed to be a provision that would level the playing field for everyone. The provisions in earlier codes were not enforceable as they were written; the provisions now will be enforceable. He also stated the energy code will change how systems are installed.
Pinnick stated the paperwork may not make every system right, but requiring the paperwork at least gives the City a base to go by if there is a problem in the future.
Luke Oehlert asked if staff would make a comment regarding if the City was planning to review the calculations for each house when the application was submitted.
Staff replied the City would verify the information given was accurate but would not be performing comparison load calculations.
Chaney stated the main focus is to set a minimum standard for people to follow. He also stated he would like to get input from the ICC and IAPMO representatives on this issue.
Schweitzer stated the purpose of the code is to get everyone doing the same job. He continued the Manual J has a disk in the back of the book that has a spreadsheet that allows the user to plug in all the variables of the house to get the equipment sizes.
Woodward explained the contractor needs to get the basics right, the calculations take a lot of the guesswork out of designing the systems.
Flory asked whether or not the code requires submission of documents at the time of permit application.
Woodward replied he would have to check the code for the time of submission.
Schweitzer stated the code didn’t give a specific time when submissions are required.
Wyatt stated he had seen in the energy code that the sizing requirements are required to be submitted at the time of permit.
Staff stated the IRC did not give specific requirements and had not checked the energy code for its requirements.
Flory asked if there are plans required now.
Chaney replied there is no requirement for plan submittal in residential.
Flory stated from her understanding there was no language in the code that requires any paperwork be submitted, it just requires that the minimum standard be met.
Chaney replied the requirement for submittal has been added as a proposed amendment to make the minimum standard more enforceable.
Pinnick stated there is latitude in the building code that allows the jurisdiction to require design submittals at the time of permit application.
Flory asked why if the contractor signs their name to the project saying they have met the code, there needs to be the requirement of document submittals further complicating the process.
Luke Oehlert stated if the requirement should also include equipment changouts and not only new construction.
Paul Oehlert agreed the requirement should extend to changeouts.
Wyatt replied if that is the route they want to go, then each change out would require opening up all the duct system for inspection.
Paul Oehlert stated if the requirement is going to be there, then it should be right all the way through the house.
Flory requested the code not be amended and stick with what is in the code since the requirement is there the builders will need to comply with the minimum standards.
Wyatt replied the way it is there was not any enforcement authority. It would be left up to the jurisdiction to determine what is correct.
Mohr stated the inspector could not always determine what was correct or not correct just by looking at it.
Paul Oehlert asked if the disclaimer would be able to work for a submittal.
Mohr replied it would not be adequate.
Luke Oehlert asked if the contractor calculated the size of equipment and then major changes were made to the plan, would they need to recalculate.
Staff replied if there are major changes made, there should be a resubmittal of the plans to reflect the changes.
Luke Oehlert stated there are many times the houses get major changes and the City is not notified.
Staff stated inspection procedures have changed to discover unapproved changes to plans by requiring the approved plans on the jobsite for inspection approval.
Jarboe stated what is really happening is the contractor is collecting data and basing decisions on it, the City is asking for the data and the decisions that are made on it.
Sparkes asked Luke Oehlert if he had a problem with submitting a shop drawing once the system is installed.
Luke Oehlert stated he did not have a problem with submitting a shop drawing. He also claimed there had been plans submitted to the City and as the building is built, the floor plan could grow dramatically by the time it was framed.
Staff stated these things may have happened in the past but the City has tightened up requirements and procedures and the plans are compared to what is built to verify what is submitted.
Wyatt asked Luke Oehlert why he had not said anything to the builders about it so they could correct it.
Luke Oehlert replied he had noticed it happening but had never called the builder on it; he would bid what he saw and not what was designed.
Mohr stated the board is not adding any requirements, they are just asking to show the work and turn it in to the City.
Flory asked if there are other trades the City requires submittal of drawings such as electrical and plumbing.
Pinnick replied electrical and plumbing do not because the code is prescriptive in the methods that are used. The difficulty is the mechanical is not performance based and even if the contractor did everything correctly, it may not heat and cool the home.
Mohr stated a contractor can look in the electrical of plumbing code and determine the sizing of the wiring and plumbing, a contractor can not look in the mechanical code and determine the size of a furnace or air conditioner. The board is asking for a tool so the City can determine the contractor has made an effort to calculate the system by a standard.
Pinnick asked the public what the concern is with requiring submittals with the permit or at rough in.
Paul Oehlert replied that he doesn’t think there is a true purpose for the contractor to submit the paperwork.
Luke Oehlert stated he does not have a concern about it other than it should be across the board. He asked if this requirement will help.
Pinnick replied any time an industry is educated on how to do a job better, it helps. He also suggested the board table the item for further discussion of the issue.
Chaney acknowledged there needs to be further discussion on the issue but was also aware of the time constraints the board is facing for completion of the code reviews.
Chaney made a motion to accept the changes as shown in option #2 and allow staff to review alternate load calculation methods, seconded by Sparkes. Pass 5-0.
Miscellaneous
None
Motion to adjourn made by Wyatt, seconded by Mohr, pass 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 8:24 p.m.