NATL INST OF STAND & TECH

A111D7 EbMED?

*z to

NBS

PUBLICATIONS

NBS SPECIAL* PUBLICATION 429

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE / National Bureau of Standards

Proceedings of the

7th Annual Conference of the

National Conference of States

on Building Codes and Standards
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The National Bureau of Standards' was established by an act of Congress March 3, 1901.

The Bureau's overall goal is to strengthen and advance the Nation's science and technology

and facilitate their effective application for public benefit. To this end, the Bureau conducts

research and provides: (I) a basis for the Nation's physical measurement system, (2) scientific and technological services for industry and government, (3) a technical basis for equity in trade,

and (4) technical services to promote public safety. The Bureau consists of the Institute for Basic Standards, the Institute for Materials Research, the Institute for Applied Technology,

the Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology, and the Office for Information Programs.

THE INSTITUTE FOR BASIC STANDARDS provides the central basis within the United

States of a complete and consistent system of physical measurement; coordinates that system

with measurement systems of other nations; and furnishes essential services leading to accurate and uniform physical measurements throughout the Nation's scientific community, industry,

and commerce. The Institute consists of a Center for Radiation Research, an Office of Measurement Services and the following divisions: Applied Mathematics — Electricity — Mechanics — Heat — Optical Physics — Nuclear

Sciences - — Applied Radiation " — Quantum Electronics ' — Electromagnetics ^ — Time

and Frequency " — Laboratory Astrophysics " — Cryogenics "'.

THE INSTITUTE FOR MATERIALS RESEARCH conducts materials research leading to improved methods of measurement, standards, and data on the properties of well-characterized

materials needed by industry, commerce, educational institutions, and Government; provides

advisory and research services to other Government agencies; and develops, produces, and

distributes standard reference materials. The Institute consists of the Office of Standard

Reference Materials and the following divisions:

Analytical Chemistry — Polymers — Metallurgy — Inorganic Materials — Reactor

Radiation — Physical Chemistry.

THE INSTITUTE FOR APPLIED TECHNOLOGY provides technical services to promote

the use of available technology and to facilitate technological innovation in industry and

Government; cooperates with public and private organizations leading to the development of

technological standards (including mandatory safety standards), codes and methods of test; and provides technical advice and services to Government agencies upon request. The Institute consists of a Center for Building Technology and the following divisions and offices: Engineering and Product Standards — Weights and Measures — Invention and Innovation — Product Evaluation Technology — Electronic Technology — Technical Analysis — Measurement Engineering — Structures, Materials, and Life Safety * — Building

Environment * — Technical Evaluation and Application * — Fire Technology.

THE INSTITUTE FOR COMPUTER SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY conducts research

and provides technical services designed to aid Government agencies in improving cost effec- tiveness in the conduct of their programs through the selection, acquisition, and effective

utilization of automatic data processing equipment; and serves as the principal focus within

the executive branch for the development of Federal standards for automatic data processing

equipment, techniques, and computer languages. The Institute consists of the following

divisions: Computer Services — Systems and Software — Computer Systems Engineering — Information Technology.

THE OFFICE FOR INFORMATION PROGRAMS promotes optimum dissemination and

accessibility of scientific information generated within NBS and other agencies of the Federal

Government; promotes the development of the National Standard Reference Data System and

a system of information analysis centers dealing with the broader aspects of the National

Measurement System; provides appropriate services to ensure that the NBS staff has optimum

accessibility to the scientific information of the world. The Office consists of the following

organizational units:

Office of Standard Reference Data — Office of Information Activities — Office of Technical

Publications — Library — Office of International Relations.

1 Headquarters and Laboratories at Gaithersburg, Maryland, unless otherwise noted; mailing address Washington, D.C. 20234.

^ Part of the Center for Radiation Research.

' Located at Boulder, Colorado 80302.

* Part of the Center for Building Technology.
PHONAL BUKEAU OF STANOIIW

OCT 2 4 W5

'I'roceedings of the 7th Annual Conference of the

National Conference of States

Qt loo

A^Lii^q on Building Codes and Standards^

Sandra A. Berry, Editor

Office of Building Standards and Codes Services

Center for Building Technology

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

Held in Austin, Texas

ApiU 28 -May 3, 1974

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COAAMERCE, Rogers C. B. AAorton, Secretary

(^.^ .NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Acf/ng Director

Issued September 1975
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 75-24777

National Bureau of Standards Special Publication 429

Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Spec. Publ.'429, 129 pages (Sept. 1975)

CODEN: XNBSAV

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 1975

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402

(Order by SD Catalog No. C13.10:429). Price $1.95 (Add 25 percent additional for other than U.S. mailing).
ABSTRACT

The National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards (NCSBCS) had its

formal beginning in Wisconsin in 1967. Its formation represented a response by the States

to recommendations for intergovernmental reforms in the area of building codes, prepared by

the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. The formative meeting held in

Wisconsin was a direct outgrowth of an earlier exploratory meeting, involving several States,

called by the National Bureau of Standards. At this meeting, the States represented

discussed the idea of a national organization of the States similar to the National Conference of Weights and Measures, assisted by the National Bureau of Standards, leading to a cooperative solution regarding the multiple problems in the entire building regulatory

system.

The Governor of Wisconsin issued an invitation to the States to gather in Wisconsin to

address the problem, to develop an organization which could effectively respond to this

national need, and to consider the offer of assistance of the National Bureau of Standards.

Sixteen States attended this meeting and unanimously agreed to the formation of the NCSBCS

and to accept the secretariat role of the National Bureau of Standards.

The Conference is 'structured to develop many technical and general recommendations in

the field of comprehensive building code administration and its programs explore the entire

system of this important segment of governmental regulatory service.

The secretariat of the National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards is

located in the Office of Building Standards and Codes Services, Center for Building

Technology, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234.

Key words: ASHRAE 90-P; building codes; mobile homes; NCSBCS.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author appreciates the invaluable assistance rendered by the former Texas NCSBCS

Delegate, Mr. Larry Crumpton, and Texas Conference Host, Mr. Charles Talmage in addition

to the following members of the NBS Office of Building Standards and Codes Services:

Gene A. Rowland, Francis T. Ventre, Charles T. Mahaffey, Bertram Vogel, Robert Dikkers,

Patrick Cooke, Robert M. Eisenhard, Maria Holloway and Kathleen Pearce. The personal

support of these individuals greatly helped to achieve a most successful Seventh Annual

Conference of the National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards.

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract

Table of Contents

Program Outline for 1973-74

List of Officers for 1973-74

List of State Delegates

List of Abbreviations

Official Opening of Seventh Annual Business Session

Roll Call of States

Presentation on Behalf of the Consumer Product Safety Commission

Dr. Lawrence M. Kushner

Vice Chairman

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Presentation of the National Fire Data System

Benjamin Buchbinder

NBS Programmatic Center for Fire

Research

Presentation of the Energy Report

Jack Tumilty, Chairman

American Society of Heating,

Refrigerating and Air Conditioning

Engineers Committee on Energy

Report on Energy Standard Implementation Program

Report of the Audit Committee

Presentation of Resolutions

Robert M. Eisenhard

NBS Office of Building Standards

and Codes Services

Douglas Renick

State of Massachusetts

Delmont C. Thurber

National Chairman-Elect

State of Montana

Presentation of Constitutional Amendments

Delmont C. Thurber

National Chairman-Elect

State of Montana

Report of NCSBCS Representative to Construction Technical Advisory

Board

Joseph Stein

Vice President

Tishman Research Corporation

iv
Report of the Legislative Committee 37

Kern E. Church

State of Horth Carolina

Report of the Executive Committee 40

Bernard E. Cabelus

National Chairman

State of Connecticut

Presentation of the Report of the Reciprocity Committee 41

Herbert Meyer

Chairman, Reciprocity Committee

State of Minnesota

Presentation of the Report of the Standards and Evaluation Committee 43

Kenneth C. Henke, Jr.

Chairman, Standards and Evaluation

Committee

State of Iowa

Presentation of the Report of the Education and Qualification Committee 46

Glen R. Swenson

Chairman, Education and Qualification

Committee

State of Utah

Presentation of the Report of the Management and Regulatory Procedures

Committee 49

Jharles J. Betts

Chairman, Management and Regulatory

Procedures Committee

State of Indiana

Election of Officers 53

Delmont C. Thurber

National Chairman-Elect

State of Montana

Presentation of Chairman's Suggestions 57

Bernard E. Cabelus

National Chairman

State of Connecticut

APPENDICES

I. List of Attendees 61

II. Executive Committee Annual Report 69

III. Standards and Evaluation Committee Membership List and

Annual Report 70

IV. Education and Qualification Committee Membership List and

Annual Report 79

V. Management and Regulatory Procedures Committee Membership List

and Annual Report 89

VI. Reciprocity Committee Membership List and Annual Report 98

VII. Reciprocity Committee Handbook 103

v
A PROGRAM OUTLINE

for the

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATES ON BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS

In Cooperation with the

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

of the

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

1973-1974

AN OUTLINE of the programs of the National Conference of States on Building Codes and

Standards for achieving reasonable national uniformity in the regulation of buildings and

the acceptance of industrialized buildings crossing State lines.

I. CODES, STANDARDS, TESTING AND EVALUATION

(Standards and Evaluation CommitteeKenneth C. Henke, Jr., Chairman)

A. Promote the activities of MCSC in

the establishment of a national

consensus standard development project (including timetable goals)

to produce:

1. standard definitions used in

building codes

2. standard building code occupancy classifications

3. standard types of construction

4. standard format for building

code use.

B. Develop support as may be needed

for the continued study of the

HUD-FHA performance standards document as a NCSBCS/CABO draft that

could be used for the development

of a national consensus standard

useful as a supplement to building

codes for the evaluation of innovative housing systems.

C. Promote the development of national* consensus standards for regulatory

reference in conserving energy

used in new buildings.

D. Promote the speedy completion of

the ASTM E32 and E36 standards making sure that this standards

activity accurately reflects the

needs of the States.

E. Investigate the feasibility of

establishing a consensus standard

development project related to the

material emanating from the NBS

Coordinated Evaluation System (CES)

research project.

F. Encourage the adoption of recognized

model building codes and consensus

standards, discouraging the development and/or use of standards that

duplicate existing model

building codes and consensus

standards

.

G. Support the development and promotion of recommendations that

will resolve the overlap of fire

codes and/or building security

requirements, with those of

building codes.

H. Continue NCSBCS participation in

the A119 standards activity and

the ANSI Construction Technical

Advisory Board (CTAB) , including

the development and timely introduction of agenda items for each

that are of special interest to

the States.

I. Identify other building standards

activities of special significance

to the States and recommend an appropriate NCSBCS relationship

to each.

J. Promote the completion of the

study of model building codes,

identifying: those subject areas

for which there are no consensus reference standards; those subject areas where the model codes

differ from existing consensus

standards; priorities among regulatory standards needs.

K. To review the role of building

regulations relative to disaster

mitigation (earthquakes, extreme

winds and similar dynamic

hazards)

.

II. EDUCATION AND QUALIFICATION OF

ENFORCEMENT PERSO^raEL

(Education and Qualification Committee-Glen R. Swenson, Chairman)

A. Develop minimum criteria for

qualifying various types and

grades of code enforcement officers and support the implementation of programs utilizing the

criteria

.
B. Participate in the flnalization

cf model legislation and model

rules and regulations for the

registration of code enforcement

officers. Direct the committee's

energies toward obtaining approval

of this model legislation by the

NCSBCS, the Council of State

Governments and the States.

C. Develop model educational programs

for code enforcement officers and

support the implementation of

such programs

.

D. Maintain an up-dated compilation of

of education and training programs,

and instructional materials for

code enforcement officers, and prepare a compendium of curricula for

code enforcement officers being

offered at various educational

and training institutions.

E. Develop model procedures to permit

interstate reciprocity for the

registration of code enforcement

officers, including the possibility

of the establishment of a "national

council of State code enforcement

officers registration boards."

F. Cooperate with other appropriate

. interested organizations in carrying out the above tasks.

III. MANAGEMENT AND REGULATORY PROCEDURES

(Management and Regulatory Procedures

Committee-Charles J. Betts, Chairman)

A. Recommend and support the development and establishment of management and regulatory procedures,

and documents which will provide

the states with appropriate models IV.

for efficient code administration

and enforcement.

B. Gather and report appropriate

statistical and background information and data on the administration and technical operations of

code enforcement programs.

C. Provide sample organization models

and staffing patterns for use by

the States for State, County

and municipal code enforcement

bodies

.

' D. Provide suggested model procedures

and documents (form, checklists,

reports) pertaining to the evaluation, approval and inspection of

buildings, building components and

produc ts

.

1. Encourage the adoption of

building permit applications

containing the uniform core information derived by the

U.S. Bureau of the Census.

E. Provide suggested remuneration

and fee schedules, general

budgetary information, and fiscal

procedures

.

F. Support the development and

adoption of uniform information

collection, and storage systems

(manual, microform and computers)

in order to achieve administrative

effectiveness and efficiency,

and to promote nationwide ex- change of statistical information

relating to building regulation

and failures (fire, structural,

electrical, mechanical).

1. Promote the adoption of a uniform fire incident reporting system utilizing the

coding system set forth in

NFPA Standard 901 and con- taining uniform core information developed by thr NBS in

the National Fire Data System

project.

G. Encourage the development and

maintenance of a technical libra*-

ry—codes and standards, product

approvals, system approvals, fire

ratings; and a library of pertinent legal opinion, case history

and law on code enforcement.

1. Recommend suggested outlines

and procedures for prosecution of code violators.

INTERSTATE RECIPROCITY FOR MANUFACTURED BUILDING

(Reciprocity Committee-Herbert W. Meyer , Cha irman

)

A. In cooperation with the S&E

Committee, identify and encourage uniformity of recognized

model codes and standards which

can serve as a basis for interstate reciprocity for manu- factured building and components.

B. Promote development and maintenance of operational rules and

criteria for agencies which are qualified to perform one or more of the following functions:

vii
1. evaluation of prototypes and

systems

2. performance of the necessary

tests required by the standards;

3. inspection and compliance as- surance at the point of manufacture.

C. Promote the development and operation of a cooperative monitoring

program to assure that evaluation,

testing and inspection agencies

are performing properly.

D. Promote the adoption of the model

acts by the States in order to

encourage interstate uniformity.

E. Develop procedures for uniform

interpretations, uniform amendments, and uniform dates for

adoption of the model codes and

standards by the States.

F. In cooperation with other com- mittees of the NCSBCS, promote

acceptance of the above programs

among the States and throughout

the building industry.

INTERSTATE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION

(Conference Officers and Executive

Committee- Bernard E. Cabelus,

Chairman)

STAFF ASSISTANCE AND SECRETARIAT

(National Bureau of StandardsConference Executive SecretaryGene A. Rowland)

A. Organization and operation of

administrative details of

meetings

B. Research and assistance for

standing committees and other

authorized NCSBCS activities.

C. Operation of Conference reference

and publications system for the

benefit of the States.

A. Conduct annual meetings of the

Conference to provide:

1. opportunity for personal

acquaintance and exchange of

views with key code people

from other States;

2. opportunity for personal ac- quaintance and exchange of

views with key building industry people;

3. opportunity to contribute to

development of interstate programs to assist individual

States to reach goals of

reasonable national uniformity;

4. 4. reports and recommendations of

the working committees and the

Executive Committee.

B. Organize publications program to

include

1. approvals and evaluations of

interstate interest;

2. general newsletters.

viii
1973-74 OFFICERS

National Chairman

Bernard E. Cabelus

State Building Inspector

Public Works Department

525 State Office Building

Hartford, Connecticut 06115

Regional Chairmen

Southern Region

C. Sutton Mullen, Jr.

State Fire Marshal

P. 0. Box 1157

Richmond, Virginia 23209

Western Region

Delmont C. Thurber

Professional Engineer

3815 5th Avenue South

Great Falls, Montana 59405

Executive Committee Members- a t-Large

David McNeill

Chief Administrator

General Construction Board

Drawer 5155

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501

Glen R. Swenson

Director, State Building Board

Room 124, State Capitol

Salt Lake City, Utah 84114

Executive Secretary

Gene A. Rowland

National Bureau of Standards

Immediate Past National Chairman

Harry A. Stone

Deputy Commissioner

Idaho Department of Public Works

State House, Annex 1 Boise, Idaho 83706

Northeastern Region

Charles J. Dinezio, Coordinator

Office of Code Development

Department of Community Affairs

141 Milk Street

Boston, Massachusetts 02109

Midwestern Region

Kenneth C. Henke, Jr.

Building Code Commissioner

Office of Planning and Programming

Des Moines, Iowa 50319

James M. Hicks, Jr.

Chief, Division of Codes & Standards

Department of Housing and Community

Development

P. 0. Box 1859

Sacramento, California 95814

Charles J. Betts

State Building Commissioner

300 Graphic Arts Building

215 North Senate Avenue

Indianapolis, Indiana 46219
STATE DELEGATES

Apri

Alabama

John R. Farris, Chief Architect

State of Alabama Building Commission

State Office Building

Montgomery, Alabama 36104

Alaska

Ronald A. Hendrie, State Fire Marshal

Department of Public Safety, Pouch N

Juneau, Alaska 99801

Arizona

Erik V. Thorne, Director

Division of Building Codes

1645 W. Jefferson

Phoenix, Arizona 85007

J. Edward Swanty ''oV Superintendent of Building Inspections

City of Mesa, Box 1466

Mesa, Arizona 85201

Arkansas

Charles T. Cvo^, Director

Department of Planning

Capitol Hill Building

Little Rock, Arkansas 72201

Jack Newbury

Manager of the Community and Regional

Services Division

Department of Planning

Capitol Hill Bliilding, 5th Floor

Little Rock, Arkansas 72201

California

Russell Bahr, Code and Standards

Administrator II

Division of Codes and Standards

Department of Housing and Community

Development

Sacramento, California 95814

Colorado

James Fresques, Director

State Division of Housing

1575 Sherman

Denver, Colorado 80203

Connecticut

Bernard E. Cabelus

State Building Inspector

Public Works Department

State Office Building

Hartford, Connecticut 06115

1974

Delaware

Calvin P. Hamilton, Architect

219 West Ninth Street

Wilmington, Delaware 19801

Florida

R. Charles Sheppard, Director

Division of Technical Assistance

Department of Community Affairs

Howard Building, Room 235

2571 Executive Center Circle, East

Tallahasse, Florida 32301

Georgia

George Bullock, Chairman

State Building Administrative Board

P. 0. Box 431

Athens, Georgia 30601

Hawaii

Robert Hasegawa, Director

Labor and Industrial Relations

825 Mililani Street

Honolulu, Hawaii 96801

Idaho ' Harry A. Stone, Deputy Commissioner

Department of Public Works

State House, Annex 1 Boise, Idaho 83707

Illinois

Jerry D. Sternstein

Deputy Director for Licensing

Department of Regulations & Education

628 East Adams

Springfield, Illinois 62786

Indiana

Charles J. Betts

State Building Commissioner

300 Graphic Arts Building

215 North Senate Avenue

Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Iowa

Kenneth C. Henke, Jr.

Building Code Commissioner

Office for Planning & Programming

523 East 12th

Des Moines, Iowa 50319

X
Kansas

Louis J. Krueger, State Architect Director

State Office Building, 12th Floor

Topeka, Kansas 66612

Kentucky

Allan Spader, Director

Office of Local Government

Department of Finance & Administration

Commonwealth of Kentucky

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601

Louisiana

Raymond B. Oliver, State Fire Marshal

109 State Office Building

325 Loyola Avenue

New Orleans, Louisiana 70112

Lee Melancon ''"V Director of Research

Governor's Office of Consumer Protection

P. 0. Box 44091, Capitol Station

Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804

Maine

Honorable Kenneth M. Curtis -> Governor of Maine

State House

Augusta, Maine 04330

Maryland

George Lewis, Secretary

Department of General Services

301 West Preston Street

Baltimore, Maryland 21201

Willard E. Bryant, Director

Codes Administration

Department of Economic and Community

Development

2525 Riva Road

Annapolis, Maryland 21401

Massachusetts

Charles J. Dinezio, Executive Secretary

State Building Code Commission

141 Milk Street, 5th Floor

Boston, Massachusetts 02109

Michigan

Barry Bro^-m, Director

Michigan Department of Labor

300 East Michigan Avenue

Lansing, Michigan 48913

Minnesota

Herbert W. Meyer, Director

Building Code Division

Department of Administration

408 Metro Square Building

7th and Robert Streets

St. Paul, Minnesota 55101

Mississippi

Senator William J. Caraway

Executive Vice President

Mississippi Municipal Association

230 Sun-N-Sand Building

Jackson, Mississippi 39202

Missouri

John A. Cooper, Director

Division of Design and Construction

P. 0. Box 809

Jefferson City, Missouri 65101

Montana

Delmont C. Thurber, Chairman

Montana Building Codes Advisory Council

3815 5th Avenue South

Great Falls, Montana 59401

Nebraska

Charles L. Brazie, Chairman

State Housing Advisory Council

231 South 14th Street

Lincoln, Nebraska 68509

Nevada

William E. Hancock, Manager

Nevada State Planning Board

Nye Building, Room 225

Carson City, Nevada 89701

Dan J. Quinan

State Fire Marshal

101 South Fall Street, 2nd Floor • Carson City, Nevada 89701

New Hampshire

William W. Hoffman « Office of Comprehensive Planning

State House

Concord, New Hampshire 03301

New Jersey

Joseph G. Feinberg, Director

Division of Housing & Urban Renewal

Department of Community Affairs

363 West State Street

Trenton, New Jersey 08625

xi
New Mexico

David McNeill, Chief Administrator

General Construction Board

P. 0. Box 5155

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501

New York

Louis Nielsen, Director

Housing & Building Codes Bureau

Division of Housing & Community Renewal

393 7th Avenue

New York, New York 10001

North Carolina

Kern E. Church, Secretary

State Building Code Council

Labor Building

4 W. Edenton Street

Raleigh, North Carolina ,27611

North Dakota

Ben Meier, Secretary of State

Executive Office

Bismarck, North Dakota 58501

Ohio

Melvin H. Mull, Member

Ohio Board of Building Standards

3049 Sylvania Avenue

Toledo, Ohio 43613

Martin J, Hughes, Chairman

Ohio Board of Building Standards

20525 Center Ridge Avenue

Cleveland, Ohio 44116

Oklahoma

Allie Isom, Director

Engineering Department

State Board of Public Affairs

Room 306, State Capitol Building

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105

Oregon

Harry Baker, Administrator

Building Codes Division

Department of Commerce

Salem, Oregon 97310

Pennsylvania

Robert L. Frambach, Chief

GSA Reviews Section

2221 Forster Street, Box 3361

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17103

Rhode Island

Frederick C. Williamson, Director

Department of Community Affairs

289 Promenade Street

Providence, Rhode Island 02908

South Carolina

L. P. Hamilton, Chief Engineer

State Budget and Control Board

Office of the State Auditor

P. 0. Box 11333

Columbia, South Carolina 29201

South Dakota

Everett N. Quan "'>' State Engineer

State Office Building #2

Pierre, South Dakota 57501

Tennessee

Edward W. Kimsey, Director

The Depar'tment of Insurance

Division of Fire Prevention

202 Capitol Towers Building

Nashville, Tennessee 37219

Texas

Charles Talmage, Director

Division of Housing

Department of Community Affairs

P. 0. Box 13166, Capitol Station

Austin, Texas 78711

Utah

Glen R. Swenson, Director

State Building Board

Room 124, State Capitol

Salt Lake City, Utah 84114

Vermont

Pierre E. J. Dennett

Project Coordinator

St. Albans Target Area Program

86 N. Main Street

St. Albans, Vermont 05478

Virginia

C. Sutton Mullen, Jr.

State Fire Marshal

P. 0. Box 1157

Richmond, Virginia 23209

Washington

William C. Jacobs, Director

Department of Labor & Industries

General Administration Building

Olympia, Washington 98501

West Virginia

Walter Smittle, State Fire Marshal

State Capitol, Unit 1 1800 Washington Street, East

Charleston, West Virginia 25305

xii
Wisconsin

John Wenning, Administrator

Industrial Safety & Buildings

Department of Industry, Labor and Human

Relations

201 East Washington Avenue

Madison, Wisconsin 53702

Wyoming

Ed Bradley

State Fire Marshal

301 Capitol Building

Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001

District of Columbia

William N. Dripps, Chief

Bureau of Building, Housing & Zoning

Potomac Building, Room 203

614 H Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20001

Puerto Rico

Lie Rafael Alonso Alonso, Chairman *

Puerto Rico Planning Board

Box 9447

San Juan, Puerto Rico 00908

Virgin Islands

John E. Harding * Director, Department of Public Works

St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 00802

* Not an official delegate; receiving mail until official delegate appointed.

Official State Delegate Alternate

xiii
Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used throughout the text.

A/E Architect /Engineer

AIA American Institute of Architects

ANMC American National Metric Council • ANSI American National Standards Institute

ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials

ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers

ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers

AGC Associated General Contractors

BOCA Building Officials and Code Administrators, International

CTAB Construction Technical Advisory Board

CEC Consulting Engineers Council

CPSC Consumer Product Safety Commission

CES Coordinated Evaluation System

CABO Council of American Building Officials

DCPA Defense Civil Preparedness Agency

E&Q Education and Qualification Committee

HUD/FHA U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Housing

Administration

ICBO International Conference of Building Officials

LEAP Laboratory Evaluation and Accreditation Program

M&RP Management and Regulatory Procedures Committee

MCSC Model Codes Standardization Council

NACA National Academy of Code Administration

NCSBCS National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards

NEISS National Electronic Injury Surveillance System

NFDS ' National Fire Data System

NFPA National Fire Protection Association

NIBS National Institute of Building Sciences

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

SBCC Southern Building Code Congress

S&E Standards and Evaluation Committee

UL Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc.

xiv
EXCERPT OF

SEVENTH ANNUAL MEETING

AFTERNOON SESSION

May 1, 1974

OFFICIAL OPENING

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: We will now call to order the Seventh Annual Conference of the

National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards. We're going to have a roll

call of States. As we call your State's name, we ask that you stand up, identify yourself

and, if you make any comments about your state, please keep them brief—within about two or three words.

MR. ROWLAND: Alabama.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Alaska.

MR. HENDRIE: Ron Hendrie.

MR. ROWLAND: Arizona.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Arkansas.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: California.

MR. BAHR: Russell Bahr, State of California.

MR. ROWLAND: Colorado.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Connecticut.

MR. CABELUS: Bernard E. Cabelus, Connecticut, and I'm glad Alaska is here.

MR. ROWLAND: Delaware.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Florida.

MR. YELVINGTON: M. A. Yelvington.

MR. ROWLAND: Georgia.

MR. BULLOCK: George Bullock.

MR. ROWLAND: Hawaii.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Illinois.

MR. STERNSTEIN: Jerry Sternstein, Department of Local Government Affairs.

1
MR. ROWLAND: Indiana.

m. BETTS: Charles Betts, State Building Commissioner.

MR. ROWLAND: Iowa.

MR. HENKE: Kenneth Henke.

MR. ROWLAND: Kansas.

MR. KRUEGER: Louis Krueger.

MR. ROWLAND: Kentucky.

(No response.)

1^. ROWLAND: Louisiana.

MR. OLIVER: Raymond Oliver.

MR. ROWLAND: Maine.

MR. BROWNRIGG: Brownrigg.

MR. ROWLAND: Maryland.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Massachusetts.

MR. RENICK: Douglas Renick.

MR. ROWLAND: Michigan.

MR. HILPRECHT: Robert Hilprecht.

MR. ROWLAND: Minnesota.

MR. MEYER: Herbert Meyer. I'm so glad Alaska is here.

(Laughter.)

MR. ROWLAND: Mississippi.

(No response .

)

MR. ROWLAND: Missouri.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Montana.

MR. THURBER: Delmont Thurber, representing the State of Montana, the new adopted

home of Chairman Bernard Cabelus.

(Laughter.

)

MR. ROWLAND: Nebraska.

MR. BRAZIE: Charles Brazie representing Nebraska, the "Big Red."

2
MR. ROWLAND: Nevada.

MR. BAST: Richard Bast representing Nevada.

MR. ROWLAND: New Hampshire.

(No response.)

MR, ROWLAND: New Jersey.

MR. TARR: Chuck Tarr, Department of Community Affairs. I'd like to formally

introduce Bill Connolly.

MR. ROWLAND: New Mexico.

MR. BERNTSEN: Robert Berntsen from Santa Fe, New Mexico, where we expect to see

you all next year.

MR. ROWLAND: New York.

MR. NIELSEN: Louis Nielsen.

MR. ROWLAND: North Carolina.

MR. CHURCH: Kern Church.

MR. ROWLAND: North Dakota.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Ohio.

MR. ROSMARIN: Herbert Rosmarin, Division of Factory Building Inspection, representing Melvin Mull.

MR. ROWLAND: Oklahoma.

MR. ISOM: Allie Isom.

MR. ROWLAND: Oregon.

MR. BAKER: Harry Baker.

MR. ROWLAND: Pennsylvania.

MR. FRAMBACH: Robert Frambach, Pennsylvania.

MR. ROWLAND: Rhode Island.

IIR. TURANO: Frank Turano, Department of Community Affairs, representing Frederick

C. Williamson.

MR. ROWLAND: South Carolina.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: South Dakota.

(No response.)

3
MR. ROWLAND: Tennessee.

MR. KIMSEY: Edward Kimsey, the great "Volunteer" State of Tennessee.

MR. ROWLAND: Texas.

MR. TALMAGE: "Hookem Horns" and "Gigem Aggies," Charles Talmage.

(Laughter.) (Applause.)

MR. ROWLAND: Utah.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Vermont.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Virginia.

MR. MULLEN: Sutton Mullen from the second home of George Washington.

(Applause.)

m. ROWLAND: Washington.

m. HEWITT: John C. Hewitt, Washington.

MR. ROWLAND: West Virginia.

MR. SMITTLE: Walter Smittle, West Virginia.

MR. ROWLAND: Wisconsin.

MR. WENNING: John Wenning, the delegate from Wisconsin. I'd like to welcome the

Virgin Islands and I think we should incorporate them a little bit more into what the

organization does.

MR. ROWLAND: Wyoming.

(No response.)

IIR. ROWLAND: Puerto Rico.

(No response.)

MR. ROWLAND: Virgin Islands.

MR. SUAREZ: George Suarez, Virgin Islands; not as big as Texas, but every bit

as good.

(Laughter . ) (Applause .

)

MR. ROWLAND: District of Columbia.

(No response.)

MR. THORNE: Arizona i-s here.

MR. ROWLAND: Has anyone else come in?

4
FROM THE FLOOR: Glen Swenson from Utah is on his way.

MR. GRAFF: Kentucky is here.

MR. FAULCONER: Frazier Faulconer, Kentucky, home of beautiful women and fast horsess

(Laughter.

)

MR. ROWLAND: Mr. Chairman, I have a count of 38 in attendance.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I think we have a few people missing. Someone said a couple of

nights ago we had 41 States represented. I- don't know whether that's been increased, but

if this is a true number, I think this is .our best attendance ever.

We are going to have a slight change in our program. We are going to have Gene

Rowland introduce our next speaker. You will get an opportunity to question the speaker

following his presentation.

MR. ROWLAND: At the Executive Committee meeting in Salt Lake City we felt that

since NBS had made a presentation to the Sixth Annual Conference in Connecticut, that it

would be appropriate for you to hear from other Federal agencies that may affect what you

are doing in building codes.

It's through this direction that Bernie wrote a letter to Dr. Kushner to address this

group today. For some background, I might say that he was a Deputy Director of the NBS

Institute for Applied Technology (lAT) when John Eberhard (then lAT Director) went to

Wisconsin in 1967, Dr. Kushner moved from that position to Director of the Institute,

and then Deputy Director of the Bureau. Just recently he has been appointed as a Commissioner oF the Consumer Product Safety Commission, one of the five Commissioners developing

the policy, the program, the staffing, and the future for that particular new agency.

I am sure that you, as well as myself, want to listen to what Dr. Kushner has to say

to us. I want to address him as Commissioner Kushner now.

He said that he will welcome questions after he has completed his formal presentation.

So, Larry, please come to the microphone.

PRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY CO^IMISSION

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: I hope that if someday somebody writes the history of the

National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards, that history will reflect

my support of the Conference from its earliest days. While I was at the National Bureau

of Standards, I was convinced that an organization of State officials was the most

promising way that this Country could go about the business of buildi,ng code reform and

putting our whole set of building regulations into a coherent form. I am delighted that

you're now holding your 7th Annual Conference and that practically all the States have

sent representatives.

Let me give a little background on why I'm here.

The story goes back to the mid-sixties. It begins with the efforts of Ralph Nader

and his associates to highlight the problems associated with automobile safety. In

time, they stimulated a general interest in product safety and in a few years. Congress

had directed attention to a number of problems in addition to the automobile. Following

enactment of the automobile safety legislation, laws concerning toy safety, fabric

f lammability , child resistant packaging for hazardous household substances, and radiation

safety, among others, were passed. In short, ad hoc responses to a series of specific

problems were undertaken by Congress.

5
By the end of the decade Congress believed it could not continue in this piecemeal

fashion. A two-year study of the broad subject of consumer product safety was com- missioned. Completed in 1970, it was an excellent study presenting to Congress an array

of facts bearing on the safety of consumers in their use of a wide variety of products.

That study recommended to Congress that a new independent, regulatory agency was needed;

one that would have broad authority to regulate the safety of all consumer products.

Congress bought that idea, and in October of 1972 enacted and the President signed

the Consumer Product Safety Act of 1972.

What did that Act do?

The Act did, in fact, set up a new Federal regulatory agency, the Consumer Product

Safety Commission. Let me emphasize that this is a regulatory agency. It is not a study commission. It is not to be confused with the National Commission on Product

Safety which made the two-year study, wrote its report and recommendations, and then went

out of existence.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission is equivalent to the other independent,

regulatory agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Power Commission,

the Federal Communications Commission, the Interstate Commerce Commission, and the

Securities and Exchange Commission. The agency has its policy set by five Commissioners

who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

The mission of the Consumer Product Safety Commission is simple. It is to reduce

the hazards that our citizens face in their use of consumer products. A consumer product is defined broadly as any article manufactured for, or intended for use by, a consumer in or around the home, at school, in recreation, or otherwise.

Does the Commission have the power to deal effectively with the hazards it finds?

Before I get into specifics, let me tell you what other people have said about that.

Nation's Business , September 1973

"Many veteran government watchers believe it

is potentially the most powerful federal regulatory agency ever created.

Congressman Jamie L. Whitten, in appropriations hearings

on the Commission:

"The Commission has so much power here its really

unbelievable .. .You 've got life or death over whether

consumers have anything to consume.

. . .more power than a good man wants or a bad man

should have."

James J. Kilpatrick, syndicated columnist:

"It must have been quite a moment for Dr. Frankenstein

when his monster got off the table and walked... The

Congress might well have put itself in the same fix

with the Consumer Product Safety Commission."

These estimates of the power of the Commission may be exaggerations, but basically

they are on track. They arise from the range of products covered, the range of regulatory options available to the Commission, and the penalties that the law provides.

The Commission has the choice, depending on the nature of the product hazard, of a ban, seizure, mandatory standard, voluntary standard, or reliance on consumer education.

Which is used depends on the nature of the specific case. The Commission can, under

6
certain circumstances, force manufacturers to recall, repurchase, repair, or replace

defective products even if they are not subject to a standard, if, because of the defect,

they could present a substantial hazard.

The Commission's mandatory standards have the force of law. The penalties that can

be imposed for violation of a mandatory standard or other product safety regulation promulgated by the Commission are substantial—civil penalties up to $500,000 and criminal

penalties of $50,000 and/or a year in jail. It's really the criminal penalties that are important. It's no problem for a corporation to pay a fine, but corporations don't go to

jail, people go to jail. And people run corporations and are ultimately responsible for

what a corporation does.

Do we have the resources to use these authorities effectively? Yes, we do. This is our first year of operation; the Commission became operational last May so we are approaching our first anniversary. In this first year we have had a budget in excess of $30,000,000

and a staff of approximately 750. The President's budget for FY 1975 requests more than

$40,000,000 and a staff of about 900. More than half of this staff is distributed in 14 area offices around the Country. These people are inspectors and investigators. They are,

in effect, the muscles and sinew of the compliance and enforcement arm of the Commission.

It has not been my intention to come here and threaten or boast about the authority

that the Commission has. The Commissioners are cognizant that they have a lot of authority.

They are determined to use it judiciously in a spirit of cooperation with all parties that are legitimately concerned with the same issues. We are keenly aware of the adverse

impact we can have if we use this authority unwisely. I hope you will be convinced of our intentions in this regard.

One of the reasons that Congress created an agency that had authority over a broad

range of consumer products was that it wanted one that could deal with hazardous products

on a rational, prioritized basis. This has been a keystone in the development of the

Commission's programs. We want to deal with the most important hazard first.

I believe we have an excellent system that gives us knowledge of which products are causing the biggest problems. We have a system called NEISS (the National Electronic

Injury Surveillance System) . This system involves 119 hospital emergency rooms selected

to give us a statistically and demographically significant picture for the entire Country.

These 119 hospital emergency rooms are tied through a computer network to our Bureau of

Epidemiology in Washington. Daily, we get from each one reports of all injuries coming in

for treatment that have involved consumer products. We get over 1,000 such injury reports

a day. We now have well over half a million reports in our computerized data base.

Each of these reports identifies the product, the nature of the injury, the age and

sex of the victim and other relevant information having to do with the accident.

In order to display this information in useful form for the Commission or for anybody

else who may be interested, we have developed something we call our Consumer Product

Hazard Index. This Index ranks nearly 400 different categories of consumer products on the basis of both the frequency with which the product is cited in accident reports and the

seriousness of the injuries involving it. We double-weight those accidents involving

children under 10 years of age.

This Consumer Product Hazard Index is public information. The first version was

issued last October and many copies have already been distributed. We are eager for

companies to see how their products are doing and perhaps do something voluntarily to

improve their safety record before a problem becomes critical.

7
We don't regard the Consumer Product Hazard Index as a priority list in that we've

got to take care of number 1 first, then number 2, number 3 and so on. This Index tells us which products are generally toward the top of the list and thus warrant the expenditure

of our own resources. Those toward the bottom of the list may not require very much by way

of resources from the Commission. Voluntary industry action may suffice.

Before deciding how to deal with any particular product on the list, the Commission

studies carefully and in depth a representative sampling of the accidents in our data base

which have involved that product. We need to find out exactly what happened. What was the

nature of the injury? What was the nature of the hazard? Only with this kind of knowledge

can we understand the hazard and deal intelligently with it.

When the list first came out last October, I was surprised by what it showed. I wasn't

surprised that bicycles, or power mowers, or matches were high on the list. But I was sur- prised that out of the top twenty, six were items that are structural components of the home

or built-in appliances or equipment. These are the kinds of things that are supposed to

be regulated by our system of building codes and standards.

It is clear that our present regulatory system does not deal effectively with many of

the aspects of safety of the home with which the Commission is concerned. Stairs, ramps

and landings turned out to be number 2 on the hit parade; followed closely by doors, number 3. Architectural glass, bathtubs and shower enclosures, cooking ranges and ovens are in the

top 20. Hot water heaters, furnaces, floors and flooring materials are not far behind.

Clearly, the home presents a number of safety problems to which the Commission must direct

attention.

It remains to be seen what specific actions would be appropriate for the Commission to

take. But it is obvious that the present system is letting an awful lot get by that perhaps

could be eliminated. On the basis of our statistics, one can project 3/4 of a million

injuries per year that involve these elements of the home and will be treated in hospital

emergency rooms. Since we know that only about 40% of all injuries requiring medical

attention go to hospital emergency rooms, one can multiply by a factor of 2.5 to approximate

a total national projection.

Being honest about it, these numbers represent injuries in which one of these features

of the home was cited as being involved, not necessarily as having caused the accident. But even if only 1/2 or 1/3 of those accidents were actually caused by the product, it doesn't

follow that the Commission's interest in the product should also be divided by 2 or by 3.

It doesn't pay to dwell on whether or not the Commission has authority to regulate

these features of the home. The legislative history is quite clear that we do —with specific

reference to architectural glass and aluminum wiring. Although the Commission does not have

authority over the basic structure of the mobile home as a unit, the legislative history

does make clear "...that the term 'consumer product' would include any component, equipment

or appliance sold with or used in or around a mobile home."

Now what is the Commission doing in this area:

The Commission, in response to a petition from the Consumer Safety Glazing Committee,

is about to begin the development of a mandatory standard that will be applicable to

architectural glass in residences.

We are dealing with the aluminum wire situation on two levels. One is to eliminate

the problem in future homes. This ultimately involves making the judgment whether or not

the present state of technology of aluminum wire and of the devices used with it in branch

circuits in homes is such as to give the Commission confidence that they can be used without

presenting unusual risks in the future. This is a technical judgment which we have not

yet made. We need to know how good the new testing and evaluation techniques are.

8
We are also concerned about the retrospective aluminum wire problem. Nearly 2 million

homes in the U. S. already have aluminum-wired branch circuits. I have the impression,

based on the information presented at the Commission's public hearings in Washington, D. C,

and Los Angeles, that a substantial fraction of those homes may put their occupants at

special risk. Such information as is available to us appears to show that a person who

lives in a house that was built in the 1960 's and has aluminum branch circuit wiring in it

probably faces a risk of firr from a failure in the branch circuits which is substantially

greater than that faced by the resident of a home with copper-wired branch circuits. This

is a serious problem, and the Commission is trying to come up with recommendations that

would be useful.

The Commission has research projects underway at the National Bureau of Standards that are designed to give us the information we need in order to make intelligent decisions on

stairs, ramps and landings, floors and flooring materials, and doors.

The Commission has over $2.5 million under contract this fiscal year at the National

Bureau of Standards involving over 50 manyears of effort. In addition, the Commission has

its own staff of experienced and competent engineers. We don't yet have our own laboratory

facilities for mechanical and electrical testing, but we do have the nucleus of an excellent engineering staff. We have a fine toxicology group which can hold its head up

in any company. The decisions of the Commission involve technical considerations in

many ways, and we want to get the very best technical advice we can.

Let me return to the aluminum wiring problem. Since you are regulators, it should

be of particular concern to you people. It has arisen in spite of the existence of a regulatory "system" that is designed to prevent just such an occurrence. The fact of the

matter is I used the wrong word when I referred to this regulatory "system." It's a regulatory "non-system."

The basic document is the National Electrical Code, which was developed and is maintained by a committee under the auspices of the National Fire Protection Association. The

committee consists of representatives of manufacturers, electrical inspectors, testing

laboratories and code officials, among others. The code itself, has all the good features

of a consensus standard—and all the bad features of a consensus standard. No single

group takes responsibility for it.

The "system" relies very heavily on certification by private bodies, principal among

them being Underwriters' Laboratories, that have no direct public accountability and are not necessarily independent financially of the companies whose products they certify.

The actual installation of the wiring and the devices is performed by people with a variety of levels of skill—from essentially none to apprentice, journeyman, or master

electrician. The qualifications requirements vary from code jurisdiction to code jurisdiction or from region to region. Only the unions appear to have a training program for

apprentices, but most residences may not be constructed with union labor. Building

inspectors have limited access to continuing education and training. Inspection suffers

from all the faults typical of understaffed, underfunded regulatory programs at all levels

of government. And enforcement is correspondingly weak.

This is the set of circumstances that permitted a number of homes approaching 2 million to have a wiring system that is judged to be relatively unsafe, and has presented

a situation which is very, very difficult to know how to undo or redress. Where does one assess liability? Whose responsibility is it that there are nearly 2 million homes this

way?

9
It is not my intention to berate UL as a participant in this "non-system." The

safety of consumers would be much less than it is were it not for UL. But the fact of the

matter is that UL is a private organization. ' It can't be too- independent. It has no public accountability. In the final analysis it is accountable to those who pay for its

services. Yet, it has come to play the critical role in providing confidence in the

system—not by evil design or intent, but by inattention and disorganization in the^ rest of

the system.

You can look forward to the Commission getting involved in these home safety areas in

a thoughtful and not in an overbearing fashion. I hope that there will be genuine cooperation between the Commission, NCSBCS and all organizations that are part of the regulatory

apparatus. Our mutual goal is the health and safety of the people who live in these homes.

This shouldn't be a "this is our territory—you guys keep out" kind of situation. All of

the Commission's policies and procedures are intended to offer the opportunity for

participation by and cooperation with all interested parties.

In the final analysis, the Commission's rules preempt anybody else's rules dealing

with the same hazard. We will seek your assistance in writing whatever regulations we

decide are reasonable and necessary. If our regulations make sense—and they should with

your help—then you should be interested and eager to help enforce them. I think this is

the right way to go.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission has no interest in developing a staff of field

inspectors th^t duplicates your own capabilities. You have the resources. You have the

people. You have the skills and you have the experience to continue doing that job.

I don't have definitive answers to all of the specific questions that can be posed

about the detailed interaction of the Commission and this group. The Consumer Product

Safety Act requires the Commission to cooperate with State and local bodies. We are, even now, setting up mechanisms through which this cooperation can come about.

We are just getting into the building safety problem and we're walking very, very

carefully. That after all, is why I'm here. It is useful for you and the Commission to

get involved in a continuing dialogue. But we all have the same interest —to secure the

safety of our citizens in their homes. Beajring that in mind, I don't think we are going

to have more difficulty than we can contend with. Thank you.

(Applause.)

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: Now I'll be happy to try to answer any questions that you'd

like to put to me. Let me first find out whether or not there is time.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Go right ahead.

FROM THE FLOOR: Your talk indicates that you identify a hazard or define a hazard

as being associated with life safety rather than damage to property. Is that correct?

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: That is correct.

MR. FERGUSON: Is the risk index that you referred to weighted by exposure or is that

purely statistically based on the number of incidents reported?

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: As of this moment, there are only three factors that are involved in the index. All that I am prepared to say is that there is a basic set; the

frequency of the citation of a product in accident reports, the severity of the injury

and then whether or not the injury involved someone less than 10 years old.

The whole problem of setting a set of priorities does involve such things as exposure.

You need to take into account how often the person is likely to come in contact with this

particular hazard.

10
It also involves whether or not the hazard is assumed voluntarily or involuntarily;

whether it's assumed knowingly or unknowingly. There are many factors that need to go

into the determination as to what is the appropriate level of concern on the part of the

Commission.

MR. FERGUSON: You indicated surprise that the top 20 list contained a lot of items

that related to the home where, obviously, all of us have spent at least half of our day

and probably somewhat more than that. Why were you surprised?

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: Because I didn't expect to see it. It's just that simple. I was surprised. You know, you're quite right. People walk up and down the stairs all day

long. You would expect to find a lot of accidents. That doesn't make it any less of a problem, does it?

MR. FERGUSON: I think it does.

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: Well, there's a point of disagreement there.

MR. CONNOLLY: You mentioned something that sounded very interesting. You indicated

that you had a very substantial budget to take care of this problem. It didn't really

sound like a lot of money to me, concerning the breadth of the problem. You said you

wanted to cooperate with people who are already in the field of enforcing health and

safety standards. Could you talk a little bit more on that or about when we could expect

that to happen?

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: Let me try to take it piece-by-piece. Thirty million dollars

in the first year of an agency's existence going up to something like $40 million seems

like a lot to somebody who came from an agency that got up to $60 million in 80 years.

I am referring to the National Bureau of Standards.

The point I want to make is that Congress has been supporting the Commission and I believe that if we find a need for substantially more money, I am reasonably optimistic

about our being able to get it.

On the other hand, I think it is probably more important that we do establish

cooperation with agencies and groups that already have substantial resources that can be

brought to bear on it.

Our effort to get together with the states has been, in a sense, on a parallel to

the effort reflected in this Conference. This May we are having a conference of state

officials concerned with consumer product safety. To the best of my knowledge, all of

the states will be represented by appropriate officials at the state level.

I think each of you should try to find out in your own state who it is that is

representing the state in this area and make your presence felt, at least, insofar as the

Commission's and your concerns overlap in connection with home safety.

This is just an exploratory meeting with the state people. As I say, it will be held

some time this month. I would check to find out who in your state is going to be representing your state at this conference.

MR. FERGUSON: You don't mean to preempt enforcement?

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: I don't see any reason why one should need to. It would be

kind of foolish for us to begin putting inspectors in the field if there are already

inspectors in the field.

MR. KIMSEY: We have a total electric inspection program in the State whereby all

electrical installations are inspected prior to service. I am quite interested in your

comment on the 75 times greater hazard in those homes that have aluminum wiring over

copper. How did you arrive at those figures?

11
COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: These are statistics that have been presented to the

Commission over a period of time and also presented to the Commission at a public hearing

held last month in Washington. There was another one held out on the West Coast in

Los Angeles.

This is on the basis of analyses of data that we have gotten from fire marshals at

various places around the Country. I really don't want to hang my hat on those particular

figures, but on the other hand, I am personally convinced that aluminum wiring in branch

circuits, as installed in years past, presents a substantial hazard to the people that have

them.

I don't know if it's 75 or 150, I don't know if it's 30 times. These sketchy

statistics would appear to suggest somewhere around 75. As I say, these statistics are obtained basically from fire marshals as the result of an Underwriters' Laboratories

survey. I'll be happy to have you write to me and I'll send you all the information we have on that

MR. BEARDMORE: To whom is the Commission responsible or accountable?

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: We are an independent regulatory agency which means, in

effect, you are accountable to all three branches of the government in a sense. You're

certainly accountable to Congress through the oversight that they provide the agency and

through Congress's control of your budget.

You're accountable to the judiciary in the sense that all of the Commission's

decisions are reviewable in the courts. We can be taken into court. The Executive

Branch, that is the President, gets his input when he nominates the Commissioners.

MR. DOWLING: It's a matter of public record in the last six months that some speakers from the Commission have stated that, if necessary, they will write a building

code. Could you elaborate on that a little bit?

FROM THE FLOOR: Elaborate a lot, if you will.

(Laughter.)

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: Well, let the guy who said that defend it. I didn't say

it. I said that the Commission had a legitimate interest in the home because of our responsibilities in connection with consumer safety. That is, the individual safety

of our citizens.

I think the Commission would be foolish to write a national building code. First

of all, building codes do involve many factors which you all know better than I, factors

that are not particularly the business of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

I don't see any need to have a national building code to take care of the problems

that we foresee because, as I say, if push comes to shove and we write a rule and it

preempts the building code with respect to that particular hazard, I wouldn't see any

difficulty or reluctance to have local inspectors enforce a Federal rule rather than

what the building code might have said with respect to that specific hazard.

I can foresee a situation in which there continues to be a basic structure of

building codes that we have today, but that some specific hazards would be regulated

according to a Federal rule. That's a situation with which I can live.

I don't know whether or not the rest of the people here can. With respect to a national building code, we have other things to do.

MR. BERINGER: You outlined the problem of aluminum wire. Would you please share

with us what your Commission intends to do about the problem?

12
COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: What we have done about it up until now is simply tried to

become as well informed as we possibly can about the extent of the problem and what the

options are that the Commission might take.

As I mentioned, we held public hearings both on the East Coast and West Coast

within the past month to try to get as much information as we could from individuals

from industry who are concerned with it who wanted to present information to us; either

for or against —on one side or the other with respect to the safety of aluminum wiring.

We've been trying to get expert opinion on the likelihood that present developments

in connection with switches and outlets and new types of aluminum alloys for wire and

whether or not these developments promise to provide safety for the future if they are

used.

What we are trying to do is to understand the problem, try to understand the options

that are available to the Commission and hopefully, within a few months make some decisions as to where we think we ought to go.

MR. CHURCH: It seems to me that your organization could be a big asset to the local

officials in trying to protect the element of safety. We are in the process. On the

other hand, it seems to me that it would be detrimental, depending on the situation of

two-way communications

.

In developing the standards themselves, it would be very useful for the -model

codes or any other standard-writing organization, states or cities ; to get to some of

these problems and correct them before you even get to them.

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: It's all public. You can write to us too.

MR. CHURCH: Well, I was going to suggest something to you. Maybe these things

could be communicated to the delegates and members. Perhaps you could put us on a mailing list. This would be very helpful.

The other thing is, as you mentioned, you probably wouldn't do anything about the

enforcement. I don't think any of us need to be told, time and time again, that we don't

have good and adequate enforcement of all of our codes throughout the Country.

I haven't heard you say anything about anything that's going to help that immediately. For instance, the aluminum wiring. We have had quite a problem with that, but

it's mostly enforcement, not being installed properly with the proper type of interface

connections. If you do it right, it's going to be cheaper and easier than copper.

Anyway, we have to wrestle with it as a legal agency before we can outlaw aluminum

wiring.

What you're saying is that if your Commission took the position that this was really

the case, it would make it easier for us to correct at the State and local level.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: If, in effect, we find that this aluminum wire becomes a problem

and you all make a recommendation, who is going to enforce those particular recommendations? The departments of consumer protection or the building code sections of the

various states and cities?

This is the key point we're getting to here, because if you're going to go to the

normal consumer protection departments, they're not equipped to qualify.

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: I guess the best answer I could say is depending on what

the Commission ultimately decides to do, we are going to try to rely on those groups,

those agenices that are in the best position to help us.

13
You know, if we're dealing with hazards in the home, I think, it's reasonable to

expect that one might get much more useful assistance from the building code inspectors

and electrical inspectors than one is likely to get from consumer product inspectors

in the various states. I'd say that we're going to try to do what is .the most intelligent

and reasonable thing to do under any set of circumstances.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Mr. Church and I have the same desires and, I think the same forebodings about this. When the problem is identified it all depends on who makes the

determination as to where it is going to be assigned and who is going to enforce it.

If the determination is one dealing with building construction and it goes to the

building official, fine. We are happy. If it goes into another group, then we have

problems. We have people that are design professionals, people like Jim Dowling,

architects —and so on. If they have to come to the building people in the State organization or local organization and then to the consumers, and one is saying one thing and

one is saying another, then we have problems.

If you're going to give it to the consumers who are going to preempt our code

technicians and inspectors, we also have problems. I think you can see there's got to

be- a lot of apprehension among the members of this Conference as to where designation

or final assignment is going to be, and who's going to make the determination. If it

works right, it could be great. If it goes the other way, it could be a horror.

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: The best thing I can say to you is that as a matter of

policy, the Commission wants input from everybody that has something useful to tell the

Commission in terms of the description of the problem, or ways to handle the problem, or enforcement difficulties that are likely to arise and who should be involved.

Now, when I say this, I don't mean to accept the obligation on behalf of the

Commmission to run continuously to the Conference and say, "Hey, what do you guys think?"

You guys have an obligation to know that there is another agency now that is concerned

with the same kind of problems you are, and this organization needs to accept the

responsibility to stay on top of us. We both have responsibilities in connection with

this communication problem.

MR. YELVINGTON: When you are making your decisions before publishing them, are you

going to be considering economics in any way?

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: Yes, indeed. The law requires that any of the Commission's

decisions shall take into account the economic consequences of what it is proposing.

This doesn't mean that there is an arbitrary reliance on a cost/benefit relationship;

that if it's less than one you don't do it. That isn't what the law had in mind, but

the law does want the Commission to be cognizant of the economic impact on what it's

proposing and we have, in our organization, a separate Bureau of Economic Analysis whose

purpose is to keep us apprised of the cost of what we're going to be proposing.

MR. CHURCH: Dr. Kushner, I agree with you that we have an obligation in the State

to improve the standards. On the other hand, you have the money and you are gathering

statistics, which would be very useful, that we have never been able to amass in any

way, shape or form from our own localities. States or at the national level. Whenever

you gather statistics and feel it's necessary to move, if those parties that are involved in writing codes and standards could be on the mailing list and receive the

information that you have at the time when you have a hearing, it would be very helpful

to us. You do have a mailing list?

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: Yes. More than that, we have a public notice policy. First

of all, any rules that we develop are developed according to the Administrative Procedures

Act.

14
They are all developed in public. The public also has an opportunity to participate.

The notices of meetings appear not only in the Federal Register which only relatively few

lawyers around the Country get to see with any regularity, but are announced through press releases and so on.

Our mutual friends at NBS generally, know everything .that is going on. There are all

sorts of ways, including the Commission's trying to get in touch with you people specifically, to keep you informed of it.

MR, MEYER: I get intrigued with this retrospect aspect you talk about. You tell us about the law and I agree with it; it has a great future. But, how does the Federal

government mandate a re-inspection and the . replacing of stairs in homes, or even replacing

aluminum wire? We have found in many years of experience that the courts look very dimly

on anybody, including an inspector, going into a home without the permission of the

homeowner. I don't know whether or not you now have suddenly found a magic formula for

doing the things we've tried to do for 30 years.

(Laughter.)

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: No, we don't have any magic formula, obviously. All we have

is a set of words that is law. You have to go through a whole set of particular realities

before you can deal with these things.

I didn't make one point in my talk. I recognize that there are two kinds of problems

that one runs into in the home that are in connection with safety.

In general, some of the things that you are concerned with are manufacturer-produced. We* can deal with those things easily. You can inspect them in the factory.

There are all sorts of ways you can handle that.

Many of the things we are dealing with now are the result of local building practices, on-the-spot kind of decisions made by technicians, and involve local inspection and

all of the other problems that you and I both are familiar with. The lav; didn't anticipate those kinds of problems and I think that the Commission is, in a sense, plowing some new ground in how one deals with those kinds of problems.

Now, it's old ground as far as the state and local governments are concerned. It's new ground as far as the Federal Government is concerned. You know, we have to take

advantage of what is already known and the skills that are here already.

I think maybe I ought to sit down now. So far, I'm ahead.

(laughter.

)

MR. ROWLAND: Larry is going to be here for a while. One of his staff, Wayne

Schif felbein, is also here in the front row and will be available to answer any questions.

We certainly appreciate their taking the time to come here today.

COMMISSIONER KUSHNER: Thanks, Gene. I hope nobody feels much worse now than they

did about an hour ago.

(Applause .

)

MR. ROWLAND: As I said earlier, the Executive Committee had an opportunity at the

Salt Lake City meeting to meet with the General Counsel of the Consumer Product Safety

Commission, Mr. Michael A. Brown, who was taken over to the Commission, or I might say

stolen, by people like Commissioner Kushner.

15
Mike was the Assistant General Counsel in the Department of Commerce working with

the Bureau. Mike has worked with this Conference. He's well aware of the group. At

that meeting, he said he would forward to us a list of the Consumer Product Safety

Commission designees from your individual States, as well as a program of the conference

that is coming up May 15 through 17, alluded to by Commissioner Kushner.

I have both of these available here. If you want to know who your state representative is in the consumer product area, this will be available to you during the

coffee break.

We will be mailing it to everybody immediately after this meeting. We have received

additional programs in our office and we can get them to you.

I think it is important, as Commissioner Kushner presented to us, that there is a two-way street here. Your Governor has appointed these designees by request of the

Commission. It will be your responsibility when you go home to sit down with your

Governor and the designee, and talk about the overlap of the two areas and some of the

problems. You might be involved in or at least attend the program on May 15 to 17. As

Commissioner Kushner has said, many of these top items are those things that are really

involved in the building. There needs to be a cooperative effort at the State government

level, as well as working with the Commission and others in Washington.

We would like to proceed with another part of the program and try to conclude it

before our coffee break, and maybe even hit some questions on the energy document because

we have a representative here now,

Mr. Buchbinder is from the NBS Programmatic Center for Fire Research, Office of Information and Hazard Analysis. He is working with the National Fire Incident System, a portion of the National Fire Data System concept which is currently being implemented at

NBS. He is here to present a background of what is going on in NBS and the fire data

collection programs.

Mr. Buchbinder, if you are here and ready, you can present your story for the group

at this time.

PRESENTATION OF THE NATIONAL FIRE DATA SYSTEM

(Whereupon slides were presented to the delegates.)

I-IR. BUCHBINDER: Thank you, Gene, Bernie, ladies and gentlemen. I do appreciate

the opportunity to address NCSBCS and continue to promote coordination between our interrelated areas of building codes and fire.

The staggering annual toll from fire in the United States consists, in terms of

human losses alone, of thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of injuries. The

National Fire Data System is a concept of the Fire Technology Division at the Bureau of

Standards for collecting, analyzing, and focusing fire data required in a variety of

programs aimed at reducing the toll of fire accidents.

Following the report of the National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control, there

is now legislation in process in the Congress to substantially enlarge fire related

activities by the creation of a new fire organization in the Department of Commerce. In

November, the Senate passed Senate Bill 1769, and just two days ago, on Monday, the House

of Representatives passed HR 11989, with only 12 dissenting votes. The legislation now

goes to a Senate-House conference.

Now, what is the National Fire Data System concept? I would like to briefly outline

the program as we conceive it, and describe the current areas of activity at NBS. First,

let's look at the purposes of NFDS. Broadly speaking, there are four purposes for the

National Fire Data System, The first is to measure the incidence of fire, both regionally

16
and nationally, in this Country. The second purpose is to identify problem areas as focal points for setting program priorities. The third purpose is to provide detailed

data in specific problem areas in direct support of specific programs. Finally, after we

have established a good measurement baseline over a period of time, we hope to measure

program effectiveness.

The NFDS user community, in the broadest terms, encompasses the areas of research,

codes and standards development, and the fire services themselves. Earlier, I mentioned

that NFDS is a concept rather than a system. This is because it involves data files of

individual fire incidents, summary files of fire loss experience, background files of fire

department characteristics and demographic data, detailed case history files relating to

specific problem areas, and compilations of technical information which are not data files

at all. The word "system" in National Fire Data System implies the combination of these

elements to provide the sum total of information and data required by a particular user

for a particular use.

One of the major elements of the NFDS concept is the Fire Incident System currently

being developed. This system addresses the first of our four major purposes —the

measurement of fire incidence. The pilot system implementation of the Fire Incident

System currently underway is based on a data file of individual fire incident reports,

prepared by the fire services in the field. The list of data elements in the file is

based on consideration of the desired output. It is based also on the very practical

consideration of which data elements are available from the systems that are currently

in use in the United States. The system will operate with existing data sources. The

basic requirements for a state or local area to participate in the pilot are that the

definitions they use in their fire reporting be basically compatible with NFPA Standard

901 so that we can combine the information, and that they cover most of the data

elements in the file. The system concept requires wide output dissemination so that we

can actively solicit feedback from the entire user community on the usefulness of output from the pilot implementation.

The growth of the Fire Incident System will be truly evolutionary. We expect, based

on the pilot experience, to increase the scope of the data encompassed on the system, and

also eventually to enlarge the coverage of the system to make it truly national. We hope

that the States not yet collecting fire incident data will benefit from the experience of

the pilot system and start their data collection on the "second floor" instead of in the

basement, where we are figuratively beginning right now.

Another project which is designed to contribute to the measurement of fire incidence,

is the National Fire Survey. This survey is cosponsored by NBS and the Consumer Product

Safety Commission. After two years of pre-testing and preparation, the field interviews

were just completed during the week of -April 15. It was a "piggyback" or supplement on the monthly Current Population Survey that the Bureau of the Census regularly carries

out. There were 33,000 households in the survey. Each household was queried regarding

the incidence of any type of fire accident involving any member of the household. Upon

positive response, a questionnaire was completed with 25 items detailing the incident.

Another questionnaire was completed for injuries or deaths which may have resulted from

the accident. This survey takes advantage of the existing field force and sampling plan

of the Census Bureau. We are cautiously optimistic that late in the fall we will have

the first statistically-valid estimate of fire incidence in American households.

In addition to these systems which address the measurement of fire incidence, let me quickly mention those activities involving detailed case history systems for in-depth

problem understanding. The Flammable Fabric Accident Case and Testing System is based on detailed case history reports supplied by the Consumer Product Safety System. There are

17
now over 3,000 cases in this file which have been used in support of the standards in the

fabric f lammability area. These detailed case history files allow us to study the patterns of different kinds of fire accidents from ignition source, to human activity, and

to the materials ignited, and to the resulting injury severity. Based on such studies,

we are able to support various programs to reduce fire loss. We are currently embarking

on another detailed case history file in the area of synthetic polymers.

In conclusion, I would like to thank NCSBCS for the support we received in promoting the

•concept of the uniform fire incident report, specifically, by means of the letters sent to

the governors of the 50 States. I hope that this brief overview has provided some insight into the National Fire Data System activities at NBS. We, in the fire program, are anxious to continue and enhance the cooperative efforts with the building codes and

standards community in the pursuit of greater life safety. Thank you.

.CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Thank you, Mr. Buchbinder. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now

take our coffee break.

(Afternoon recess.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Again, we are going to change our order of business just a bit

because we have the gentlemen we have all been waiting to hear. He comes from that great

group they call ASHRAE.

Mr. Jack Tumilty is Chairman of the ASHRAE Committee on Energy and is going to come

up here and give a progress report. I would imagine that he will be open to questions.

If you address any questions to him, please first identify yourself for the record.

Thank you.

PRESENTATION OF THE ENERGY REPORT

I'IR. TUMILTY: Well, I'll toot my own horn. Ladies and gentlemen, I appreciate

the opportunity of coming today. I hope that I will be able to answer some of your

questions by giving you an update on what ASHRAE is doing, what we plan to be able to do,

and possibly something along the line of our schedule.

As to my background, I'm an ASHRAE member and have been for a good number of years.

I am a consulting engineer and practice engineering in Tulsa, Oklahoma where I am a Vice

President of Collins Engineering Associates.

There may be some of you who know William J. Collins, Jr., who is President-Elect,

almost President-Elect of ASHRAE. That may not make me an expert in energy, but I got

the job and so here I am.

On February 27, our President, Rod Kirkwood, received the NBS document which had

been prepared at your direction. We were asked to take that document and prepare a standard.

In ASHRAE, this is generally, a very tedious and time-consuming operation. We were

asked to make the time as short as possible because of the need for a new standard, or a standard in energy conservation, or the reduction of energy use in new buildings.

We have tried to do this. We formed a committee which I was asked to chair. It

is a regular ASHRAE standard-writing project committee.

It is a larger committee than normal. We have included on that committee people

who are particularly interested in certain portions of building. We have a representative from the American Institute of Architects, one from the Illuminating Engineers

Society, one from the Electric Energy Association, as well as people in ASHRAE who are experts in equipment, equipment rating, equipment manufacturing, users of equipment and

designers. We also have two other consulting engineers. The make-up of the committee

is a cross-section of our industry. Suffice it to say, we have met five times already

since the first of March for one- or two-day meetings.

18
We took the NBS document and literally took it apart. We handed individual chapters

to people on my committee and asked that they review that particular chapter as far as ASHRAE's standards and procedures are concerned, and come up with what will now be a re- write of chapters, and produce an ASHRAE standard.

We are in the process now of finalizing that operation. We had hoped to be finished

by May 1. Obviously, we are not or I would be waving something here in my hand.

I think we've come a long way. Our next meeting is May 9. At that time, we will

have all of the rewritten chapters for the Executive Committee to review.

Following that, assuming that the Executive Committee is capable of putting together

a standard at that time, we will produce a draft, the first draft of ASHRAE Standard 90-P.

This draft will be sent to the ASHRAE Standards Committee and it will be instructed

to send this out for open review. We also have a small problem with copyrights, so we

are not going to turn loose of this first draft until our legal counsel has made a determination about how ASHRAE can, in fact, copyright a draft of a standard. This is in

the process now and we expect the problem to be worked out by May 9.

Following the time that it goes out for open review, there will be approximately

90 days during which anyone that is interested in the draft can take a look at it and

provide written comments.

At the present time, we expect the review period to end on August 31, 1974. However, this time period will be publicized. Adequate time will be given for people to look

at our draft and to comment on it.

When the comments are received at ASHRAE headquarters, they will be sent back to my

committee, and will be utilized in finalizing the ASHRAE standard which you are looking

forward to receiving.

It is our hope—our intention—to have this standard available by the end of this

year. However, I should say this to you, the draft which will come out very soon probably

will be changed. I caution you to go easy with the draft, if you are planning to wave it

in front of the face of code-writing people.

Let me explain to you now what an ASHRAE standard is, and what you will need to do with

it. An ASHRAE standard is not a piece of legislation. Those of you that are interested

in refrigeration may know of the B9 Code, Refrigeration Safety. This is basically an ASHRAE standard, but it is referenced in most codes where refrigeration safety is involved.

This is the sort of thing that ASHRAE is producing. We are producing a regular standard which can be referenced by number into your legislation. There will be no legislative

implementation contained in our document because we can't write that sort of thing; but,

there will be available to you information on how to implement this thing; possibly not

from ASHRAE, but the Bureau of Standards. I understand they are planning on helping with

this particular phase.

You will reference, in the final analysis, the ASHRAE standard by number and it will

look very much like what ASHRAE normally produces in a standard.

I believe I have covered, generally, what we are doing, where we are and what we hope

to do, and I will be most happy to try to answer your questions if any of you have some.

19
MR. ANDERSON: Where and from whom will cof)ies of the draft, when your committee

finishes it, be available?

MR. TUMILTY: It will be available from ASHRAE headquarters, 345 East 47th Street,

New York, from Nicholas A. LaCourte, Director of Standards.

MR. DUKE: Sir, what happened to the interim standard that is supposed to come out

May 1?

MR. TUMILTY: You notice that I have dropped the word "interim." Let me explain to

you what ASHRAE, and particularly my committee, has considered.

We were asked to produce a standard. It was called an interim standard, but we have

felt that that word "interim" has a certain connotation of something that is going to be

easily or quickly replaced.

ASHRAE has no procedure for producing such a thing as an interim standard. Therefore,

we have dropped that word from our vocabulary and we are calling this a draft.

It is the same document, but it is not called an interim standard.

MR. KIMSEY: Will the NCSBCS delegates receive a copy of this piece of material, or will we have to write for it?

4.

MR. TUMILTY: I don't believe that there is any procedure set up right now for that.

It is possible that arrangements could be made for the delegates to receive it. I suggest

that Bernie contact Nick LaCourte with a request.

MR. CHURCH: Will the standard be written in a form that can be applied as an alternative of what I would call a "cookbook" approach to be used by the non-professionals in

tjie area for small buildings, and also of a performance-type that will require a design.

Or, will, it be written in such a manner that you have to have a mechanical engineer do the

design to be sure you comply with the standard?

MR. TUMILTY: At the present timej it is the latter. There are no data available

right now where we can provide you with an accurate energy budget, and I think that is

what you are alluding to.

However, a task group in ASHRAE is working toward producing such' data. Hopefully,

a more cookbook or energy-type approach can be included, if not in the first standard,

in an early revision of the standard.

We still are looking at the three path arrangements, but a final decision on that

has not been made and will not be made until May 9.

MR. CHURCH: Do you need some recommendation on that? A lot of small buildings are not so designed, and volumes of heat loss and gain is in a lot of small buildings. This

is the type of problem that we're confronted with.

MR. TUMILTY: We would appreciate any input that would be accurate. ASHRAE must

produce a technically-accurate document. We can't go out on the street with something

that is not technically correct.

Any data that you might have from others that are involved in this type building will

be most helpful, and would be appreciated during the open review time.

MR. FLINT: What plans, if any, are there to establish this for review?

MR. TUMILTY: The procedures being followed for review by ASHRAE are in accordance

with ANSI. We are accredited in this review process and, hopefully, when it becomes an ASHRAE standard, it can at the same time be presented to ANSI and be a national consensus

standard. We're following the correct procedure in this respect.

20
^IR. FLINT: Does that mean that there will be an announcement in the ANSI Reporter

then?

MR. TUMILTY: In the last May issue of the ANSI Reporter, there will be an announcement that this ASHRAE standard is out for review. We've already made contact with

ANSI for that.

MR, STEIN: I am the NCSBCS representative to the Construction Technical Advisory Board

to ANSI. As of our last meeting just about a week ago, ASHRAE still hadn"t taken any action or even submitted a canvass list for approval. These are all necessary if you're going to move to accomplish something this year.

MR. TUMILTY: This is the publicity that was sent out, and I may be able to give you a date—I'm sorry, it isn't dated, but it probably has gone to ANSI since your meeting. The

press release and the canvass list have been prepared.

MR. FERGUSON: What is the scope of the document?

MR. TUMILTY: The scope of the document at the present time includes all new construction. However, within the body of the standard, there will be some exceptions allowed, and some of these will be in the area of single and two-family dwellings and mobile

_homes; particularly where there are existing standards such as the FHA-HUD 51B, which the

housing industry normally follows.

We are anticipating incorporating or referencing that in certain portions of the

standard, but the scope will include all new building with the exceptions written into

the body of the standard.

MR. BOWLING: I have a question for both you and Bernie. Would not both of you gentlemen agree that the delegates who would like to have this information now should wait

until the complete process has been finished before referencing this into state legislation?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I feel we'd be premature to do that now. I think we've already

been told here that we would be advised against it, and we would have to concur with that.

MR. TUMILTY: I would like to emphasize that what we are going to see in a few weeks

is the first draft, and very likely it will be changed considerably because of the open

review process, I would hate to see someone reference a proposed standard, which is what

90-P indicates, when a final standard will be available by the end of the year.

I would urge you to go slowly and follow the procedure of review, and then pick up

tke final document at the end of the year.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I have a question. Do you have any magic formula whereby we can hold our own legislators back from trying to

(Laughter.

)

MR. TUMILTY: Well, as somebody else said, I'm not going to tell you my magic formula

for anything.

(Laughter.)

MR. TUMILTY: I understand the problem. As a person in the consulting business and

having to deal with building codes and standards, I know that it is important to keep the

legislature from doing the wrong thing.

On the other side, being an engineer and being a member of ASHRAE, I know we have to

produce something that you can live with, and it has to be as technically-correct as we are capable of producing; otherwise, it won't be of any use to you. You don't want to ref- erence something that is not accurate.

21
MR. DOWLING: Wouldn't it be proper then for the Executive Coiiimittee here to make a recommendation that the delegates take back to their governors this information, and suggest that they discourage any State legislation in this area until it is completed?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Well, it can be done that way. I would rather, later on under new

business or something, someone bring up a motion whereby the incoming Chairman write a letter to all the governors expressing the opinion of the Conference to this effect. That

might have a lot more weight and be effective. If ASHRAE could endorse it with a com- panion letter, it might be a great assistance.

MR. TUMILTY: Again, I thank you for the opportunity. I hope I've answered your

questions. I plan to stay around for a few minutes, if you want to catch me outside, but

I do have to leave the city later this afternoon. Thank you again.

(Applause.

)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: The time has arrived in the program where Bob Eisenhard has a presentation for us on energy.

MR. ROWLAND: Since the last annual meeting. Bob Eisenhard has been assigned the

responsibility of riding-herd on the energy support programs, as well as being a com- munications individual for us in NBS on inquiries with regard to our design criteria document that we turned over to the National Conference of States in February.

Therefore, Bob has become the project leader of the supportive efforts of carrying

through the programs necessary for performance standards and is your contact with regard

to the energy standard. He is going to make a report on where some of these supportive

programs are now.

REPORT ON ENERGY STANDARD IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM

MR. EISENHARD: Thank you. Gene. It appears to be appropriate to start out any talk

here with some rather frightening accurate statistics. Sitting down there, I tried to

think up some frightening statistics that might relate to energy.

On the spur of the moment, the only thing I could recall was that after an energy

blackout two or so winters back in New York City, there appeared a modest population

explosion about nine months later.

(Laughter.

)

Now, these don't appear to be accurate statistics, so never mind. Actually, the

energy stakes are quite high. You may look several places for statistics on the cost of

the barrels of oil to be saved by building energy conservation, and you can find several

answers

.

I would suggest that we may be talking about $2.5 to $5 billion a year by the year

2000, if we have only a modest reduction in the waste of our energy utilization in

buildings

.

For those of you from the North where they leap barrels with ice skates, you can figure that as something like a million and a half barrels a day; if you can picture this

succession of barrels down the lake.

I want to go back, and give you a chronology of NCSBCS energy work, because I think

it's important that we look at what we have assumed in retrospect. I think it is one of

achievement, both on the part of the Bureau and on the part of NCSBCS and others that

have been helpful along the way.

In November of 1972, Reese Achenbach of the Bureau briefed the S&E Committee on the

energy activities of the Bureau. There was considerable concern generated even then that

NCSBCS needed a building energy standard, and NBS was asked to report back with the

possible content, and a strategy for generating such a standard.

22
As you can see from this early reference, NCSBCS was not a Johnny-come-lately when

the energy crisis burst onto the scene last spring.

In Hartford, the entire Conference was briefed on the energy programs going on at the

Bureau. By late May, there was much concern in several States that they needed short-term

and also long-term actions to conserve energy in buildings; and by June, the Bureau and

NCSBCS joined together to sponsor a joint emergency workshop for three purposes.

One, was to define the magnitude of the problem—talk it over. Two, was to identify

energy-saving actions that could be taken in the long and short runs, and three, was to

discuss ways that the States might develop the necessary consensus standard.

• By early July, NCSBCS had requested that the Bureau develop such an original standard,

and in August this project was formally accepted by the Director and the project team was

established.

In September, the work was in full swing and it was announced by a joint NCSBCS and

NBS press release in Des Moines, Iowa, and Washington, D. C. By November, another workshop was- called to assess the approach being taken on the draft standard and to receive

technical comments from the 250 participants assembled to discuss this matter.

One of the outcomes of this particular workshop was the emphasis on the need for

implementing assistance. In other words, not only the standard, but how to get it implemented in the real world.

On November 19, NCSBCS requested model legislation and implementing assistance for

the standard. In December, the Bureau agreed to this request. By January, which was only

a little more than a year away from the time it first came up as a subject of concern in one of the NCSBCS committees, the energy document was completed and sent out for impact

analysis and technical evaluation.

On January 31, and February 1, the Executive Committee was briefed at NBS on the

criteria and the tasks that they had asked be developed in relation to its implementation.

By February 27, as most of you now here remember, the final revised draft was presented to NCSBCS in Salt Lake City and turned over to ASHRAE for its final manipulation

into an interim or draft standard, and the final standard. You've heard about the followup from there.

The advent of this new and far-reaching standard gives us both the obligation and the

opportxmity to design and implement a delivery system for a major performance standard.

As most of you in the building industry are aware, performance concepts have been

talked about for at least 15 years and, apart from some scattered successes, the performance concept is still more of a gleam in the eye of the proponent than it is a working tool for the regulatory agency. Let me first list for you the tasks that have

been identified and make-up the delivery system, and the mode of operation that the NCSBCS

Executive Committee has chosen to pursue toward the end of implementing this new standard.

The first task is the drafting of model enabling legislation. The approach used was to

modify the Model State Building Code Act produced last year by using a working group for

comment on a rough draft and to prepare a final draft. This has been done and the Model

State Building Energy Code Act has been presented here.

The second task is to establish procedures and forms for energy use. The method of

accomplishment that the Executive Committee chose for this particular task was to request

that NBS add to and modify the Coordinated Evaluation System (CES) documents to cover

these requirements.

Task number three is based on laboratory accreditation and here NCSBCS desired to

sponsor an independent, high-level, broad-base national accreditation board to recommend

action on laboratory applications for accreditations.

23
Task number four is test methods development for the standard and the solution is to

have test methods developed by consensus committees with input from NBS, the accredited

labs and other interested parties. As you will notice, as we go through these, some of

these are not new. Some are methods that have been used in one way or another over the

years and some are more innovative. The hope of this effort is to draw the delivery system

together and make it function in the proper manner.

Task number five is training activities for industry and regulatory officials. Here

the desire of NCSBCS is to approach the Defense Civil Preparedness Agency, which has con- ducted training for technical and construction design professionals, and ask them to plan

a training program and to approach the Federal Energy Administration for funding.

Task number six is the sponsorship of a criteria through the consensus procedure. I don't think we need to talk any more about that. That is proceeding. There has been some

delay, but I think it's a realistic delay, and hopefully, the end result will be satisfactory to everyone.

Task number seven is the construction and maintenance of an index of approved solutions. NCSBCS desires to seek authority and funds to maintain such an index of approved

solutions with the assistance of the Department of Commerce in establishing the appropriate

authority and the initial set-up.

Task number eight is the feedback loop for interpretations and revisions. Here they

desired the sponsor of the standard to handle these with small committees. As you look

at standards from time-to-time, you find that people amend them for their own use rather

than going through the revision procedures. They either find the revision procedures don't

respond as rapidly as they would like or they are not effective. NCSBCS feels that this

is a very important part of the system and it must be available and functioning.

Task number nine is to identify and coordinate existing' standards in the building

area that either overlap or impact upon the new standard. Here the Executive

Committee requested that NBS handle this through its internal Center for Building Technology Standards Council. Those standards which are in conflict should be reported to

ANSI and the appropriate action taken to work out these conflicts.

The tenth and last task is continuing review and evaluation of the tasks. NCSBCS, as the user of the standard, has undertaken this function.

The Executive Committee instructed Chairman Cabelus to assign the tasks to each of

the standing committees, as appropriate within their purview, for oversight, and that is

the way it is being carried out. As far as the Bureau is concerned - I'll put on the

other white hat - the Bureau is pursuing these tasks on two levels.

One, we are endeavoring to work with a NCSBCS standing committee and the Executive

Committee in seeing that these tasks get initiated in appropriate correspondence, discussions, and whatever else is necessary. On our own level, we are preparing these programs in draft, and developing the appropriate funding schedules we estimate will be

needed to implement this entire system.

I do have some copies of the criteria which NBS prepared. I know from time-to-time

they were difficult to obtain and we have a few left. I have them with me. Should anyone

care to see me later, I'll be glad to give you a copy. Thank you.

(Applause.)

MR. ROWLAND: I might add a little bit to what Bob has presented to you on behalf of

the Bureau. The Center for Building Technology, through Jim Heidenbrand, is working with

the ASHRAE Committee. Jim worked, on the development of our research paper, working with

the ASHRAE Committee and helping relay what information we had to that Committee and

getting some feedback from it.

24
The Director of the Bureau, Dr. Roberts, has been very much concerned that the project be moved along, and that it meet the opportunities of savings of energy that the original task set out to do. .

There was some concern that we could end up with something that didn't save any en- ergy at all. Sometimes a consensus procedure ends up with the lowest common denominator,

in which there isn't any energy savings.

Dr. Roberts is concerned that there be an opportunity here to meet some challenges,

and that means a little tightening up by everybody. So he is following the project very

closely, including the reports from the ASHRAE Committee and keeping behind the project.

About the time we finished our preliminary draft and it had gone out for some review

to try and determine whether we were in some 'kind of a workable ball park, and before presentation to the NCSBCS Executive Committee in Salt Lake City, we did two things.

One, we submitted a January draft to many people in the industrial sector who would

be involved with products or materials that were reflected in the draft. We also con- tracted with several A/E firms and other institutions to do what we call an evaluation of

an average building-type of construction, and to give us back a report on the economic impact and the energy savings that would result by use of that draft.

This document is still floating around in the private sector. It's dated, I think,

January 24. If you have one of these copies, it is not the draft that was submitted to

NCSBCS in February. There was considerable modification between the January and the February drafts. The February draft took into consideration much of the data that we gathered

by this review procedure.

We learned some lessons and got some good reports back. It was interesting that in some types of structures there was a good acceptance of the document. In other types of

structures, acceptance was poor because of the intricacies of the document itself.

For instance. Kern brought up the point that you cannot pay the engineering costs to

make an analysis on every single house that's built. The cost would just skyrocket.

There needs to be a certain type of house construction that would meet some standard and

be identified as solutions to the problem. As Bob said, there needs to be a collection

of accepted solutions.

We find that engineering and evaluation costs were high on small buildings. We also

found that when we dealt with AE firms who had done extensive good design on an interdisciplinary type of development, there was very little increased cost in engineering.

In other words, they had the technical engineers and the availability of staff to

handle the project along with what they normally did, except they had to watch P's and

Q's a little bit more on the energy concepts than they had before. But, they had a good

intergrated office to do it.

We did find where an architect was practicing alone and was using only mechanical

consultants, that there was increased cost. We had to foot an entire new concept of design to that subcontractor—the architectural firm—and there was some effect in this area

as far as economic cost and engineering evaluation.

I bring these things up because, at the Bureau we have not done an economic study on our final document that was turned over to NCSBCS in February. We wanted to see what

ASHRAE was going to come up with, and then take our February draft and ASHRAE 's draft back

to some of these contractors and have them restudy where the economic and energy savings

are, and where the economic impacts are, to know whether it is a workable document.

25
I mentioned to Bernie a little earlier, when the question came up of giving authorization to the new Chairman in response to Jim's question, that I think that nobody should

be buying a pig in a poke without another go-around of really taking a look at whether

these things do meet the challenge of energy conservation.

That is what it started out to do; that is what it ought to end up to do; and, I think that's what NCSBCS is looking for it to do; and, that's what NBS is looking for it

to do.

We have a commitment to try to come up with something or work with some document that

will do that. We have not done any economic studies on our last NBS draft or on an ASHRAE

output which we are waiting for. We hope that when that comes out, we will be able to

do that study, and turn back to you a real good picture of whether the problem is being met

with the use of these draft documents.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Is there anything more on energy? Any questions directed to the

people who have reported here?

MR. SUAREZ: At the workshop in November, I think the consensus was that this new

energy conservation measure was supposed to be sort of a performance document, rather than

a specification document. Apparently, from what he has indicated, it's going to be a specification document and sort of deviating from the performance document. Is this a correct assumption?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: The state-of-the-art of performance is one on which you can make

the statement, "all buildings should save fuel," and the other is, "how do you do it?"

I think that within the given state-of-the-art of equipment that is available on the market and a lot of other things, ASHRAE is trying to come up with as much of a performance

concept as possible. But, I think they are finding very clearly that the equipment and a lot of the other things available in the marketplace can't deal with performance at this

time. Yes, I think they are backing down.

We wrote up more performance, but also we weren't taking in the fact that there were

a lot of ratings we asked for that weren't available. So they are working more in the

real environment, and we're going to move ahead with a regulation which is quite specification-oriented; but, it does provide the industry with a challenge to move forward as much as possible in performance in the next couple of years.

Are there any other questions?

(No response.)

If not, we'll move back to the report of the Audit Committee.

REPORT OF AUDIT COMMITTEE

MR. RENICK: Kern Church from North Carolina and Frank Turano from Rhode Island

serve on this Committee. We find the annual financial statement as submitted by the

Conference Coordinator, Sandra Berry, and the Treasurer, Charles Betts, to be in order.

We would recommend that the Conference approve this annual financial statement as submitted.

I will just give you the key figures off of it. We have posted on the table downstairs a copy of this two-page report, if any of you have interest in checking these

figures

.

The total cash on hand as of April 1, 1973, was $1,864.70. The total receipts as of

March 31, 1974, were $13,386.22. The total expenditures were $12,010.89, leaving a checkbook balance of $1,375.33, and a savings account balance of $1,589.26.

26
The total cash on hand at the end of March 1974, was $2,964.59.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Thank you.

MR. THURBER: Mr. Chairman, I move the adoption of the Audit Committee report.

MR. KIMSEY: Second.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: The motion has been made and seconded to accept the report. Any

comments on the report?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: If not, we'll move it accepted.

(Whereupon the vote was taken and the motion was carried.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Resolutions.

PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTIONS

MR. THURBER: These resolutions are nominal. There are seven of them. They are predominately bread-and-butter type resolutions. I will read them all and we'll give you a recommendation after I read each one. We can vote then.

Resolution No. 1: Be it resolved that the National Conference of States on Building

Codes and Standards expresses its deepest thanks and appreciation to Charles Talmage, Conference Host, for his time and extensive efforts in assisting the Seventh Annual Conference

in its accommodations, coordinating this program, arranging for a most successful outing and

in many other ways contributing to the success of this meeting of NCSBCS.

The recommendation is to pass.

No. 2: Be it resolved that the National Conference of States on Building Codes and

Standards does express its sincere thanks and appreciation to the State of Texas, the City

of Austin, and to Governor Dolph Briscoe for the warm and gracious welcome and for the most

enjoyable hospitality sKown to this Seventh Annual Conference of NCSBCS.

The recommendation is to pass.

No. 3: Be it resolved that the National Conference of States on Building Codes and

Standards does extend its thanks and deep appreciation to the Executive Committee for its

devotion to the goals of this National Conference, and for its many efforts which have served

to increase the growth of the Conference and to increase the influence of this Conference of

States in codes and standards activities in this nation.

Be it further resolved that this Conference commends and thanks the individual members

of the Executive and all Committee Chairmen and Committee members, whereas, recognizing their

duties to their individual States, these individuals have given freely of their own time and

money in supporting and furthering the aims of this Conference. Further, this Conference is

deeply appreciative of the dedication of these men to the aims of this Conference.

The recommendation is to pass.

No. 4: Be it resolved that the National Conference of States on Building Codes and

Standards extends its deepest appreciation, sincere gratitude and highest commendations to

Conference Chairman Bernard Cabelus for his dedication to the goals and aims of this Conference and for the immense amount of time and effort he has given to this Conference and its

programs

.

27
Further, be it resolved that this Seventh Annual Conference of the National Conference

of States on Building Codes and Standards expresses its heartfelt appreciation and thanks to

all of those who have provided the excellent and highly valued staff assistance so necessary

to the success of this Conference and the achievement of its goals.

It is further resolved that this Conference individually thanks and commends Gene A. Rowland, Francis Ventre, Charles T, Mahaffey, Robert Eisenhard, Bertram Vogel, Sandra Berry,

Kathy Pearce, Maria Holloway, Robert Dikkers, Pat Cooke.

The recommendation is to pass.

No. 5: Whereas, the entire constituency of the Seventh Annual Conference of the

National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards did attend and partake of a most wonderful evening set forth by Jim and Marie Inks doing business as the Inks Ranch

of Llano, Texas;

'And whereas , each individual has herein expressed his deep appreciation to the Chairman

of arrangements for this dinner;

And whereas it is felt that expressed thanks be given to said Jim and Marie Inks;

Therefore, be it resolved that this Conference go on record from its Executive Committee

as expressing a most heartfelt thanks for the wonderful evening at the Inks Ranch.,

The recommendation is to pass.

No. 6: Whereas, the entire constituency of the Seventh Annual Conference of the

National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards did attend and partake of a most wonderful conference outing assisted by Edwin and Mildred Dalrymple,

And whereas each individual has herein expressed his deep appreciation for their

thoughtfulness and assistance during the outing.

And whereas it is felt that expressed thanks be given said Edwin and Mildred Dalrymple,

Therefore, be it resolved that this Confernece go on record from its Executive Committee as expressing a most heartfelt thanks for the wonderful Conference outing.

The recommendation is to pass.

No. 7: Be it resolved that the Seventh Annual Conference of NCSBCS expresses its

heartfelt thanks and appreciation of those who have provided the excellent and highly

valued staff assistance from the Texas Office of Community Affairs to the success of this

Conference and its goals

.

It is further resolved that the Conference individually thank and commend Ann Cain,

Linda Reese and Jay Stilwell.

The recommendation is to pass

.

Mr. Chairman, I recommend the adoption of all seven resolutions on a due pass basis.

MR. BETTS: I so move. m. HICKS: I second.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: The motion is to take all seven resolutions and vote on them together. The motion has been made and seconded. Any comment?

(No response.)

28
(Whereupon the motion was voted on and was passed.)

MR. THURBER: I recommend, the discharge of the Resolutions Committee for the Seventh

Annual Conference.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Thank you. You are discharged.

MR. THURBER: As a matter of .fact, I m^ke the motion.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: You can't make the motion to discharge yourself.

MR. MULLEN: I'll make the motion. '

MR. MEYER: I second it.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Any comments?

(No response.)

(Whereupon the motion was voted on and was passed.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: The Chairman of our Constitutional Committee has something.

MR. THURBER: I have a lot of Constitutional amendments here. They came in on sheets

of paper like this. By the way, Maria, do you want these resolutions handed to you?

MRS. HOLLOWAY: I do, please.

PRESENTATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

MR. THURBER: I'm going to read them all. If you'll notice, there will be some over- lapping in some of these recommendations for amendments. Some of them I can't tell exactly

who submitted them, or to what section they apply, as I haven't had time to research the

Constitution and Bylaws.

I'm certain that when I get through reading them, the Chairman will probably want to do

certain things with them. First of all, I want to read them in the order that I got them.

This one is from Mr. Henke, the Chairman of the Standards and Evaluation Committee.

His amendment to the Constitution, he would like to put to the floor as follows:

He wants to add, "a copy of all proposed amendments must be submitted 30 days prior to

the meeting to the person designated by the Conference Chairman." I suspect he means the

annual meeting. Right?

MR. HENKE: Yes.

MR. THURBER: That is one amendment which came up. Another amendment by the same Ken

Henke, he wishes to add, "to support the activities of the Conference in levying of annual

assessments and the charging of fees related to program operations as hereby provided."

A lot of these will hit you cold turkey, but I think you will see in a few minutes what

possibly could happen.

Here is an amendment by Charles Betts, Chairman of the Management and Regulatory Procedures Committee.

Under "Delegate Members," under "MEMBERSHIP," the first sentence, "The State shall be

represented by an individual..." That's the wording that is presently in the Constitution.

29
He wishes to add, "...currently active In the development and/or enforcement of building codes and standards in his state and..." Then, it goes on like the present Constitution

says, "...designated by the chief executive officer or the State legislature. ARTICLE III,

OFFICERS. All officers, including committee chairman, shall be duly appointed delegates as defined in Article I, MEMBERSHIP."

Erik Thome from the State of Arizona recommends changes to the Constitution and Bylaws

to read, "The Chairman of the Reciprocity Committee shall be a member of the Executive Committee."

Number 2, "A delegate member, whether elected or appointed to a Committee, who has not

been active in the Committee assigned to, or has not appeared at the Committee meetings or Annual Conferences, shall be dropped from active participation from the said Committee."

Number 3, "Legislative Committee. There shall be a legislative committee consisting of

at least three and not exceeding five members, appointed by the Conference Chairman, representing the various regions of the Conference."

That is overlapping with another one. Under that "(a) The Legislative Committee shall

meet to elect its Chairman. (b) In all phases of legislative matters, the Committee Chair- man shall report to the Conference Chairman and the Executive Committee for policy on legislative matters, prior to input into any Federal and/or other state legislative matters.'

The last one here is .kind of lengthy, but I think we can get through it quite fast.

It's to clarify the role of associate and advisory members. This has long been a task.

Article I. MEMBERSHIP. Membership Determination. In case of question as to membership classification, the delegate member of the respective State in which the applicant

resides or represents, shall decide the issue;."

He crossed out the words, "...and such determination shall be binding on the Conference .

"If the applicant in question resides in a State that has no delegate member, classification shall be decided by the Executive Committee, except that the Executive Committee

shall not have power to classify members as delegate members. Such determination shall be

binding on the Conference."

He wishes to add a new paragraph, "Privilege of Associate and Advisory Members.

Associate and Advisory Members may attend all meetings of the Conference, as well as Conference and Standing Committees, except an executive session of the Executive Committee.

They may be appointed to serve on Conference Committees, and are appointed to serve on Standing Committees. In all Conference and Committee actions. Associate and Advisory Members may introduce motions and participate in discussion, but voting privileges are limited

as provided in Article II, VOTING."

Article III, MEETINGS. Executive Session. He wants to cross out, "The Conference

Chairman is authorized to order an executive session of the Conference at any time such a session is deemed by him to be in the best interest of the Conference. An executive session shall include all delegate members present." That one he wants to cross out, and

instead put in, "All Conference meetings are open to all member classifications, invited

guests and the press. The Conference Chairman is authorized to order an executive session

of the Executive Committee at any time such a session is deemed by him to be in the best

interest of the Conference."

Article II. VOTING. Bear with me; only two more pages. "At all Conference meetings

the delegate member or his duly authorized proxy shall be entitled to one vote for each

office to be filled, or other matters subject to vote. Unless otherwise specified, all

matters subject to determination by vote shall be resolved by a majority vote of the

delegate members or proxies present and voting. Election of officers shall be by secret

30
ballot if so requested by any one with voting privileges; otherwise, election shall be by

motion acclamation."

He wishes to add, "Action of all Conference Committees shall be governed by vote of

the delegate members or duly authorized proxies. Delegate, State, Associate and Advisory

members of standing committees shall each be entitled to one vote on all matters subject to

standing committee vote."

Article IV. RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. Section 1. National Bureau of

Standards Assistance. Revise to read, "Cooperation with the National Bureau of Standards.

The National Bureau of Standards, Center for Building Technology may serve as the Secretariat and also furnish technical assistance, and serve as a research facility for the

National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards. This cooperation —" he

strikes out the word 'sponsorship' — "is exercised under the limited authority of that

portion of the Organic Federal Act under which the National Bureau of Standards is authorized to undertake 'cooperation with other governmental agencies and with private organizations in the establishment of standard practices, incorporated in codes and specifications.'"

"Within the limits of available funds, and upon request of the Executive Committee, the

National Bureau of Standards assists the Conference by supplying technical assistance,

information, and secretarial service to the end that the Conference may act effectively,

constructively and with fairness toward all affected interests."

"Within the limitation of applicable Federal authorization and policy, the National

Bureau of Standards publishes and distributes reports of the proceedings of the Conference,

reports of the Conference Committees, and any model laws, regulations, standards, and

recommendations adopted by the Conference."

Now, he strikes out, "If requested by the National Bureau of Standards," and says,

"The Conference will — instead of may — advise the National Bureau of Standards,"

striking out "on establishing priorities, etc.," he adds, "of research needs, including

priority of need, which would assist the States and nationally-recognized, standardgenerating organizations in the development of codes and standards to be better performanceoriented. "

The last one, "Cooperation with the National Building Officials Organizations. The

Conference shall, through its appropriate committees, establish a cooperative relationship

within the Building Officials and Codes Administrators International, Inc. International Conference of Building Officials, Southern Building Code Congress, and other similar

organizations, to further the common aims and objectives of State and local agencies

having responsibility to implement building codes and standards for the protection of

public health and safety."

"Until such time as a single nationally-standardized code is available, the Conference

will encourage States considering promulgation of a State building code to adopt, without

amendment, one of the model codes published by the Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc., the International Conference of Building Officials, or the Southern

Building Code Congress, and will further encourage other governmental units within those

States to take similar action, as a means to bring about intra- and interstate code

uniformity."

Mr. Chairman, these are the Constitutional amendments, overlapping as they possibly

may be, which have been presented to me to date as the Chairman of the Constitutional

Committee.

MR. HENKE: In view of a motion I made at the Executive Committee meeting this morning,

I would like permission of the Conference to withdraw the two amendments that I did submit,

but request that they be referred to the Committee when it is formed for consideration in

the Constitutional rewrite.

31
CHAIRMAN CABELUS: We have these resolutions presented by Mr. Henke and he has asked

that we withdraw them.

MR. HENKE: Only the ones that I submitted,

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Yes, only the ones that you submitted. In his amendment, if I recall correctly. Ken requested that they be in 30 days prior to an annual meeting, that

the Constitutional Amendment Committee review them, and then come in with recommendations.

It is obvious, with the number of proposed amendments, the conflict, and the overlapping, that it is going to take a considerable amount of time to really evaluate them.

MR. CHURCH: I had some that I had proposed, and one was by the direction of the

Executive Committee. In fact, I sent them out by mail prior to the Conference to all the

delegates

.

After getting here and hearing all the discussion and the volume of amendments that were being proposed, I didn't send mine to Del. I think that this indicates that we do

have growing pains, and we have more activity and interest in the Constitution and in the

Conference

.

I think it's healthy and I think it's good, but I don't think we should resolve all

these Constitutional changes in this meeting. We need a procedure - in fact, I would

like to see a committee formed, and these really should be presented to the membership in

writing, 60 days before the annual meeting, so everybody can study them beforehand.

Therefore, I'm going to make a motion that all these presented, plus the ones I had

sent out, be referred to a special committee, as recommended by the Executive Committee, and

a procedure be established by the new Executive Committee to place them before the Conference at the next annual meeting.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Is there a second?

MR. SWENSON: Second.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Any comments?

MR. MULLEN: I suggest that we allow some time here today to offer any comments that

they wish on any of these resolutions, even though they are referred to a committee. :

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: That doesn't mean an amendment. It goes without saying that if

this action is taken that Kern has proposed, we are going to have time on our schedule, and

I would hope then that we can give considerable discussion to these, so at least the

delegates present will have an idea of what we are talking about, and realize the scope and

depth of this.

We now have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion on this?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: If not, we'll move to the question.

(Whereupon the motion was voted on and passed.)

MR. MEYER: I'd like to raise a point of order. We presently have a procedure for

amendments, and I don't think this motion can dispose of that. It says that it must

be sent out for a written ballot and a reply within 60 days. I sympathize with this and

I appreciate the fact that Ken asked that his amendments be permitted to be withdrawn. I would like to suggest to the people that have submitted their amendments that they

withdraw them; otherwise, this automatically means that it goes out to the delegates who

are not here.

32
I agree that this is not the right procedure because of the time we've had and the

rest of it. I think we ought to ask the proponents, if possible, to withdraw their amendments and then if there is one, we can send it out with an explanation.

MR. THURBER: I'd like to make a comment on that, in line with your thoughts. Herb.

Sometimes you get into real sticky difficulties in meetings. I know what you're talking

about

.

Ken has seen fit to ask that his two be withdrawn. This means that he can hand them

back to me Friday morning and we can refer them to the new Constitution Committee.

Erik Thorne, if he were to do the same thing, they could be handed to the new Constitution Committee which will be formed by the Executive Committee.

These could all go to the Constitution Committee. I appreciate your thoughts on

these. Herb, and I like to see details speeded up like that too. I think if we can cut some red tape, we'd have a better ball game.

MR. ROWLAND: A point of order. There has been a reference to an Executive Committee

action that has not been presented to this delegate body. You are really talking about

something that hasn't been put on the floor yet.

Now, I think, as a point of order, if the Executive Committee will put that resolution that they had in the Executive Committee meeting this morning on the floor, then you

can take the action and send the amendments, and this thing can proceed. Otherwise, that

won't come up until the order of business tomorrow in the Executive Committee report. I think, as a point of order, let's put the Executive Committee action on the floor.

You see, not everyone was there this morning, and the delegates have the right to

vote. That was in Ken Henke's motion this morning.

MR. HENKE: If I may, I'll present the motion I made this morning to the entire

body. I made a motion that the Chairman appoint a Constitutional Revision Committee to

review the Bylaws and Constitution of NCSBCS, to bring them more in conformance with the

desires of the delegates of the Conference. I further recommend that it be a committee

of not less than six people, which would be comprised of a representative or a delegate

from each one of our four regions, a member of the Executive Committee, and the Conference

Chairman as an ex officio member of the group, and that they be prepared to report back at

the next annual conference of NCSBCS.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: As I remember, that's accurate. Ken.

MR. MEYER: Second.

MR. THURBER: Now, there was an addition to that.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Any comment on that?

(No response.)

(Whereupon the vote was taken and the motion was passed.)

MR. MEYER: Mr. Chairman, I would like to move that we accept the report of the Constitution Committee and also that the delegates present go on record as asking Erik Thorne

if he would withdraw his, so we wouldn't have to go through the process now that we have

the Constitutional Revision Committee established. The others have been withdrawn.

33
MR. BETTS: Inasmuch as we are going to revise the Bylaws and so forth, this means

that we have to use the present procedure until that is done, which means then that we still

are about two years off from a new operation, aren't we?

MR. ROWLAND: One year.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: One year.

MR. EISENHARD: A point of order. The Constitution says that any scheduled annual or special meeting. It seems to me that one of the committee weeks could be termed a special

meeting.

MR. BETTS: That's what's bothering me; the time lag. We have to operate under the

present Constitution and Bylaws, which says that we have to have a mail ballot and all this.

What I'm asking is, is there any way to get around this, and he has come up with an answer.

MR. SUAREZ: If there are any amendments that can't wait a year, maybe we can get

around this by getting a roll call now of the voting delegates, and see what constitutes a majority of the total voting delegate membership.

MR. ROWLAND: The Constitution requires that we go by mail. We can't do it in an open

session.

MR. SUAREZ: Can we adopt any amendments that will get a majority of the total membership?

MR. ROWLAND: Only through mail ballot.

MR. BETTS: Is there any way to finalize it before the next annual meeting?

MR. ROWLAND: Yes. Bob said that the Chairman can hold a special meeting for constitutional purposes, and notify every delegate 30 days before the meeting, by registered mail, of

the subject and issues that are going to be addressed. You put them on the calendar and

review them and then you go to a 60-day vote by registered mail on the action.

MR. BETTS: All right. Shall we give the Committee a deadline?

(No response.)

MR. THURBER: I think you'll find that there will be a deadline.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: The Chairman of this Constitutional Committee is going to be your

Conference Chairman, and he is going to be the one responsible for seeing that these things

are done and I'm sure he will.

MR. THURBER: I think I can assure you that in accordance with what you've passed here

that we are going to have this Committee one of the first ones appointed. I'm sure that it

will move forward very fast.

MR. BETTS: He would like to talk some more.

MR. HENKE: Evidently, Erik has left the building. In order that we can stay action

on this and not get into procedure whereby his amendment must be pulled out in order to

vote - I move that we table any further action on this until tomorrow.

MR. THURBER: May I make a comment on that before he gets too far? Erik's is not in

the form of an amendment. It is merely suggestions.

MR. BETTS: I'm a little confused about what is going on. Have these proposed amendments been read into the record and are they part of the record?

34
MR. THURBER: Yes.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: He read them in.

MR. BETTS: Are you going to require that the record be cleared and that they no longer exist?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: That's actually what has happened. We will resubmit them Friday

morning, and the new committee that we will appoint on Friday morning will go to work on

them. .

'

MR. BETTS: It's actually swept clean? •

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Right. Now, I just want to ask one question of Kern Church. Does

this answer all the questions that you had?

MR. CHURCH: Yes.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I just wanted to be sure that we are not leaving anything out.

MR. CHURCH: I anticipated this. I knew that if they were submitted and read on the

floor that they would have to take a vote on them. I didn't want that done.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: You're a real southern gentleman. We had a motion by Herb Meyer

to discharge our friend from Montana, and a motion made to second the discharge. I asked

for comments and there weren't any and then we never did get to a vote.

MR. THURBER: Question on the motion.

(Whereupon the motion was voted on and passed.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: We'll go to the NCSBCS Representatives to other organizations. I think there should be something of interest coming up. Are you involved in that, Kern?

MR. CHURCH: No, it's Joe Stein.

REPORT OF NCSBCS REPRESENTATIVE TO CONSTRUCTION TECHNICAL ADVISORY BOARD (CTAB)

MR. STEIN: CTAB, Construction Technical Advisory Board to ANSI, is represented by

myself. I am an uninstructed delegate. Basically, the operations of that board are perfunctory, passing on canvas lists, requests to extend or modify standards, the sort of

thing that there isn't sufficient time to get back to the group.

Although I have, on occasion, called Ken to discuss some of our actions because it

appears there would be some controversy, particularly the A40 situation, the plumbing

code, I didn't have an organized point. I didn't realize it was coming on the agenda

right now, but A40 is meeting in Chicago on the 16th and 17th of May. I will be attending

that meeting.

It does not appear so far that they are following the indications that Ken came back with from San Diego that they were going to move toward a performance presentation.

The few actions I've gotten from them which require some action, seem to indicate

purely prescriptive approaches. I intend to bring this up at the A40 meeting in Chicago.

I suspect, if they are keeping their word, that they may be coming up with two

parallel documents and I just may be seeing the beginnings of the prescriptive one, but

I don ' t know

.

35
Another item of importance, and I'm glad I have a captive audience here. I'm sorry

I missed the S&E meeting on Monday. I got here last night. There is something that we felt

is an important function of this group, but we've had so many other important things that we haven't devoted too much attention to a very important function that we should be doing.

I'd like to read a letter that came to the Advisory Board Chairman from the Executive

Standards Council of ANSI. It's self-explanatory. I'll tell you what action we took.

At its February 19 meeting, the Executive Standards Council discussed in-depth the

interface between the voluntary standards sector and the regulatory bodies. One of the primary

concerns of the Executive Standards Council is the return criticism of the voluntary sector's

ability to meet required time limits for the development of standards needed by regulatory

bodies.

It was the general feeling that, as a first step in overcoming this criticism, it was important for the voluntary sector to anticipate the standards needed by the regulatory

sector, in order to be able to meet those needs in time. As a result of this conclusion, it was voted that technical advisory boards be requested to monitor standards activities under

their jurisdiction, and determine specifically what they foresee in terms of standards needs,

particularly with respect to regulatory areas, and report back to the Executive Standards

Council as soon as possible, but no later than four months from the date of the request.

Your early attention to this matter is appreciated.

The request is dated March 12. Unfortunately, the technical advisory boards only

meet a few times each year. I made a motion, which was unanimously accepted, that in order to

meet this mandate, a formal request be sent to the model code groups, and to NCSBCS, not

necessarily in that order, but to those five groups, and to urgently request their con stituency to come up with an anticipation of the many areas that standards are lacking that

require immediate action.

Now, certainly, had we not taken the action on the energy standard, this might have

been one. I can think of a few which should be on the list. I think, since this is one of

the best attended meetings, plus good representation from the model code groups, I just

want to anticipate receiving this letter and, hopefully, all of you will go back to your State

and respond as promptly as possible to this with standards you feel are lacking or outdated

standards that you feel require updating so that appropriate action can be taken by ANSI

to find the appropriate secretariat, or at least catalize movement to developing those

standards. '

I can think of curtained walls, glazing of tall buildings, for example, as being a standard that requires some prompt attention, just as a starter.

That's about all I have to say unless anybody has any questions.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: If not, the Chair will entertain a motion to accept his report.

(No response.)

MR. BETTS: So moved.

MR. HENKE: Second.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Any discussion?

(No response.)

(Whereupon the vote was taken and the motion was passed.)

36
CHAIRMAN CABELUS: The report is accepted. Is there anyone else to make a report?

(No response,)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: If not, we will go on now to the Legislative Committee report.

REPORT OF THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE

MR. CHURCH: I made this report yesterday to the Reciprocity Committee, and submitted

it in writing, and sent it to all the delegates. With your permission and with the hour

being like it is, I believe I will just briefly summarize. Would that be all right?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: If it's all right with the delegates, it will be all right with the

Chair.

MR. CHURCH: I was appointed by Chairman Cabelus to act on behalf of the Executive

Committee in two functions. One was to represent the Conference at the Council of State

Governments ' s meeting in Seattle, Washington, to explain the Model State Acts, which had

been previously developed by working groups under the leadership of NCSBCS.

I attended that meeting on June 21, 1973. I'm happy to report that the Model Manufactured Building Act, the Model Mobile Home Act, and the Model State Building Code Act

are included in the 1974 Suggested State Legislation , Volume 23, which went to all 10,000

State Legislators throughout the United States, and I am informed further distribution by

the National Bureau of Standards was made on these specific acts.

We lost one of the acts and that is the one on certification of building enforcement

officials. The reason being that it has on the front of the document that this particular

act had not been checked legally, and also I could not state that a large number of States

already had experience in this kind of legislation.

Of course, in the other three acts, I was able to quote the number of States which

already had State legislation and had had experience, and a number of the members of the

legislative committee also were familiar with such legislation.

I was also asked to appear before the appropriate bodies of the U. S. Congress by

the Executive Committee to appear on behalf of NCSBCS on mobile home safety legislation.

There were five Federal bills introduced in 1971 and seven during this past year. A

great deal of activity was going on in this area.

I did appear before the Congress —before the Senate Committee on July 24, 1973. I presented a statement which included the policies and recommendations by NCSBCS, and

suggested that in any implementation of standards being proposed by either the Federal

Government or being required by the States, that they follow the procedures outlined in the

model state legislation.

One thing I made clear, on behalf of NCSBCS, was that NCSBCS was against any Federal

legislation in this area to start with, but if they did, the policy as expressed by NCSBCS

was to at least incorporate these policies within that legislation.

The Senate Bill 3066, which is the Senate Omnibus Housing Bill, has already been

passed and does incorporate the Mobile Home Safety Act. There is an act in the House of

Representatives that is about four or five bills; three of them in the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, and one in the Committee on Banking and Currency.

There were hearings scheduled twice for three of these in the Committee on Interstate

and Foreign Commerce, but they were postponed and we had no opportunity to speak to them.

We did send a letter to the Committee expressing opposition to the bills as they were written because they did not incorporate the policies of NCSBCS, and expressed the desire

that the NCSBCS policies be incorporated in these bills.

37
We did the same thing to the Banking and Currency Committee. Now, on the NIBS

Bill, I was not specifically authorized or directed to address that particular one,

but I found out that there were two bills in the Congress this year. Senate Bill 2103

and House Bill 8346, and that their hearings were closed. I found this out on August 8,

1973.

Hearings were closed and written testimony could be given up until August 14, 1974. I wrote a letter and enclosed copies of the previous testimony that NCSBCS had decided on in

1971, which supported the NIBS legislation with the provision that changes be made so that

the NIBS Board would be more responsive to State and local authorities, as well as the

building community as a whole.

I would like to make some changes at this time in my report. I say House Bill 8346

failed in the House on April 15, 1973; but I've found out since I've been here that there

is a Senate Bill incorporated in the House Bill and the Senate Omnibus Housing Bill which

has already been passed. ,

I 'ye not had a chance to review that bill yet, but it uses the words "National

Institute of Building Sciences," rather than the "National Institute of Building Standards."

It must be the old bill.

I don't know whether anybody knows about that or not, but it indicates to me that it was the old bill that was introduced in 1971, rather than the newer version just introduced

this past year.

I would like to add that there is a NIBS Bill which has already passed the Senate, in

addition to the mobile home legislation which has passed the Senate.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I'll accept a motion for acceptance of that report.

MR. THURBER: I move the acceptance of the report.

MR. BETTS: Second.

MR. CHURCH: I'd like to add that the constitutional amendment I prepared to establish a permanent legislative committee was not given to Del along with some others, but

hopefully will be considered along with the Constitutional Committee.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: It's been moved and seconded. Any questions?

(No response.)

(Whereupon the motion was voted on and was passed.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I have some announcements to make. The attendance lists are

copied. They are at the main desk.

Now, we would ask that you be sure that your name and address are correct. If they

are not, please let Sandi know out there. Make sure that everybody is on the list. We

would like to have a complete list.

Tomorrow morning, the Regional Breakfast is going to be at the Regency Room in the

Villa Capri and the time is 7:30 AM. We want you there at 7:30, because I have called a 9:00 AM meeting of the Executive Committee and Delegates only. Observers will not be in

here; this will just be for delegates.

Any of you fellows that are looking to be Regional Chairmen, remember, you can nominate anyone you want tomorrow morning at that breakfast.

MR. CHURCH: Could you tell everybody who is up for election?

38
CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Do you have it? I don't have any idea.

MR. ROWLAND: Del Thurber has that information.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: One thing I want you to do if you're going to nominate anyone,

make sure they are people who will be able to attend meetings and travel, because Regional

Chairman all become members of the Executive Committee.

MR. THURBER: You want me to read this?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Yes.

MR. THURBER: The Regional Chairmen whose terms expire are; from the Southern Region,

C. Sutton Mullen, Jr.; from the Northeastern Region, Charles Dinezio of Massachusetts. In

the Western Region there is one year remaining on ray term as I move up to National Chairman

from Chairman-Elect. From the Executive Committee Members-at-Large , the terms of

Charles Betts of Indiana and Glen Swenson of Utah expire, and Jim Hicks of California

leaves one year unexpired. That's as it stands now.

On the Executive Committee, Mr. Cabelus moves to Past-Chairman and I move up to

National Chairman, Sutton, Dinezio and myself are to be replaced, all but the Midwestern

Region, Betts, Swenson and Hicks are Executive Committee Members-at-Large.

Any questions? We have a Regional Chairman in each of three regions and three

Executive Committee Members-at-Large.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: After the breakfast, the delegates will please be here at 9:00

o'clock. It's very important. We're going to discuss some very important things here;

money, organization and Constitutional changes or amendments. It's very important that all

delegates be here so they know what we're doing.

MR. ROWLAND: Just to keep one thing clear, in answer to Xern's question and

also to Del, in the morning we will try to get to each regional group a recap of what you

presented, because there is also the question of the two-year term and the completion of the

term. When you're electing an Executive Committee member for a two-year term, the consideration of attendance should certainly be kept in mind. The two years of four meetings a year,

or eight meetings is important. Where someone may be completing one year and I think

Del has one year left in his term for instance, there would be a one year election of

the replacement of the Conference Chairman-Elect. We'll get that information to you for

your meetings tomorrow so you'll have an idea of what years are involved.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Gentlemen, we stand in recess until tomorrow.

(Evening recess .

)

39
MORNING SESSION

MAY 2, 1974

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Gentlemen, I call this sessi.on to order. Before we start is there

anyone else outside in that other room that belongs in here? If so, someone please call

them in so that we can begin.

Someone said to me this morning that Del Thurber is Montana's oldest karate expert.

Instead of a Black Belt, he has black suspenders.

(Laughter.

)

To start, I am going to give a report of the Executive Committee of the National

Conference of States on Codes and Standards. Normally, we just hit the highlights because

you do get written reports of all the committees.

I will say that this has been a fruitful year. NCSBCS has accomplished several

important tasks. The Council of State Governments accepted and published three Model Acts

that were developed by joint State and Federal action.

Those were the acts on which we had the assistance of several industrial groups and were the result of a lot of long and hard work. It just wasn't this past year, this

started a long time ago. We have seen a crash program instituted by NBS in response to the

request by NCSBCS for energy criteria.

The criteria was given to the Conference and we, in turn, turned it over to the

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) for

development of an energy standard that can be implemented by the States.

As you know from the report that you received yesterday, ASHRAE is involved deeply in

that work at this time.

Our Reciprocity Committee has collected recommendations from the States for the improvement of the ANSI A119.1 Mobile Home Standard. This material has been forwarded to NBS for

review and recommendations.

Through the dedicated leadership of Herb Meyer, the Reciprocity Committee was instrumental in developing a new cooperative procedure for proposing amendments to ANSI

A119. While I do not, as a matter of policy, single out individuals, I must give credit to

Herb for his dedication to the NCSBCS. The Standards and Evaluation Committee developed

procedures for increased State input for the A119.1 document.

The Standards and Evaluation Committee has also been very active in participating in

many nationally-recognized organizations, such as the Model Codes Standardization Council,

MCSC: American National Standards Institute's Construction Technical Advisory Board, known

as CTAB; the Council of American Building Officials, CABO; American Society for Testing

and Materials' Committees E32 and E36 ; the American National Standards Institute's

Committee A40; and the American National Metric Council which is a new and important area

of involvement.

The Education and Qualification Committee, through its Chairman, has seen fit to give

the rights of the Swenson 100 Point Evaluation Plan for Building Officials to the NCSBCS.

This was a sort of numerical rating for building officials. There is much work to be done

yet to complete the development of it, but the idea is such that at a glance you can evaluate a building official and know what is his particular specialty. This Committee has

participated in the National Academy of Code Administration, NACA, and various other

educational areas

.

40
Our Management and Regulatory Procedures Committee has distributed the Fire Reporting

System of NFPA to all State Fire Marshals and their respective governors and urged them to

adopt same. This Committee has done extensive work in attempting to formulate uniform

permit application forms with the cooperation of the Bureau of the Census.

And that, gentlemen, is my very brief report on the activities of the NCSBCS Executive

Committee. I would entertain a motion from anyone for its adoption.

MR. SWENSON: I so move.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Second?

MR. HENKE: Second.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Any comments?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: All in favor?

(Voting.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Opposed?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: It's carried. You know, one thing about the air in Texas, it's a lot nicer than up in ^lontana. Up there air pollution is murder. Up there if you want to save your life, don't breathe.

(Laughter.

)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: We are going to go into reports of the various Conference Committees.

With that, I will ask Herb Meyer to give his Reciprocity Committee report.

PRESENTATION OF THE REPORT OF THE

RECIPROCITY COMMITTEE

MR. MEYER: Mr. Chairman, members, ladies and gentlemen, I asked to do this now because

I am going to have to leave later and I won't be here for the rest of the Conference. I do

want to tell you that I appreciate being here, and I would like to make a couple of comments.

Most of you have copies of the report. As I said previously, I have had tremendous

cooperation from the members of the Reciprocity Committee and it is appreciated. I certainly

expect that they will continue the same sort of thing in the future.

I'm sure most of you have heard the definition of a winner and a loser. A winner is a person who is committed to something and the loser is the man who makes promises.

I would like to assure you that in my estimation, the members of the Reciprocity

Committee are people who have made commitments for reciprocity as such, and I look forward

to a great year next year.

I would like to submit at this time the report of the Reciprocity Committee. The

Reciprocity Committee met on September 20, 1973, in Des Moines, Iowa; December 4 and 5, 1973,

in Boston, Massachusetts; and February 28, 1974, in Salt Lake City, Utah.

The officers of the Committee are as follows. Chairman, myself; Vice-Chairmen : Southern

Region, John Steele, Texas; Northeastern Region, J. D. Brownrigg, Maine; Midwestern Region,

Vernon Eder, Indiana; Western Region, Erik Thorne, Arizona.

41
The Committee adopted a procedure for proposing amendments to ANSI A119.1 This

procedure would utilize the technical staff of NBS to review proposed amendments and to

allow members of the Committee to approve or disapprove the proposed amendments.

These recommendations will be forwarded to the NCSBCS delegate to the AIJSI A119.1

Committee for his use in presenting the recommendations, through his vote, on the various

amendments proposed by the Reciprocity Committee and others.

In addition, the Committee nominated additional members as alternates for the various

sections of the ANSI A119.1 Committee so that NCSBCS would have somebody in attendance at

all task force meetings.

The members are as follows. Edward Kimsey, Mechanical; John Steele, Heating;

Harry Baker, Electrical; Rex Early, Structural. The Committee established a handbook which

was prepared by Sutton Mullen. The handbook incorporates the various procedures and programs

of the Committee and will be used as a guide for the members and other interested parties.

The handbook will be maintained by the Committee as various programs and procedures

are outlined and established.

The Committee has encouraged the continuance of the Reciprocity Committee program by

and among the various States, and also between State agencies and private agencies.

It is hoped that the monitoring program can be established in the next year so that

the entire Reciprocity Committee can become credible and acceptable, not only by the industry,

but also by the consumer.

The Committee also reviewed the CES documents and encourages the use of these documents

by various agencies together with the model acts that were prepared in the past . Respectfully submitted by Herb Meyer, Chairman.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: You have heard the Report of the Reciprocity Committee. The Chair

will entertain a motion.

MR. BROWNRIGG: I move to accept the report.

MR. TURANO: Second.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Any comments?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: All in favor?

(Voting.

)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Opposed?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: It's carried. We will now go on to the Report of the Standards and

Evaluation Committee, chaired by Ken Henke.

42
PRESENTATION OF THE REPORT OF THE

STANDARDS AND EVALUATION COMMITTEE

MR. HENKE: Mr. Chairman, delegates, guests, I would like to present the Annual Report

of the S&E Committee. It has been, I think, a fruitful year in which we continued many

programs that were started by my predecessor, and we have initiated some new activities.

I will not read the report because most of you have received the draft copy of it and

will receive a finalized copy in the mail. I will try to summarize it.

In the Program Outline, we identified some 12 priority areas in which we attempted to

confine our work. However, we found that shortly after we developed the Program Outline, new items came to our attention which caused us to actually put aside quite a few of them

and concentrate our attention on others.

As has been noted, our Committee is active on many national committees.

Oh the ASTM E32 and E36 we have had the assistance of .Dick Furlong representing NCSBCS,

and he is an instructed delegate. We did this because Sutton Mullen had served in this

capacity, and at times, found himself in an embarrassing position of not really being able to

be as objective as he would like, as he is the Chairman of the E32 Committee. We did appoint

Dick to represent NCSBCS and free Sutton's hands and let him deal freely and fairly with all

the members of the E32 Committee.

For the second year I have been the NCSBCS delegate to A119.1 Committee and have

participated in practically every one of the conferences that they have had.

Ed Starostovic, the Swede from Wisconsin, has been representing us on the MCSC scene as an instructed delegate. Joe Stein has been our representative on the CTAB. Dick Furlong

has represented us on the Tall Building Conference, and erroneously, I have reported

Gene Pester as representing us on CABO. This is not true. Gene has provided a liaison for

us for which we have been thankful. As for the A40 National Plumbing Code, Joe Stein is

the representative on it and I have been an alternate to him.

I have worked with the energy document preparation, and we just recently have requested

the Executive Committee to seek a seat on the American National Metric Council in order that we might become active in that particular field.

There are other committees in which we would like to participate, but unfortunately,

13 members on a committee does not permit us to spread ourselves any thinner than we are presently.

The E32 is currently in the process of going out for comment and we will be optimistic

and say that, hopefully, we will have a document that can be used for laboratory accreditation

in the very near future.

The process on the A119 has been worked out to where I think we, as a national organization, for the first time will have a tremendous effect on what the structure of this document

will be in the future. At the present time, I serve not only on the full A119.1 Standards

Committee, but I also have been designated as a member of the Correlating Committee, which

is a 20 member group; so we do have representation at all three levels. We now have at

least five people working at the Task Force level where the real guts of the operation is. I think there are about 45 members on the full committee, and we now have one vote on the

Correlating Committee.

The process is in there where you as States can get together and support any type of

amendments on a NCSBCS position or posture. You'll be able to review and comment on all

amendments proposed on a national basis, and we can then take a position, and, if necessary,

get in there and get into an all guts fight. This is what it sometimes takes. The Chairman

of the Reciprocity Committee has already explained a little of it, and I would say

43
support that Committee with all the effort that you possibly can. We will make it a document that is usable and will be usable nationally.

The MCSC report is in there. You will be able td read through it.

Joe has given us a good report on the CTAB, and our presence is being felt at that

point

.

I had the opportunity of attending the A40 Committee meeting in San Diego in January

of this year, and we did receive a tentative agreement from them. I say tentative because

it has not been finalized. At a minimum, there will be two documents developed. One will

be a specification document, such as presently exists, and the other one will be a performance

document that you, as States, will be able to reference any time you deem necessary.

do note that in some of our conversations with CABO they have expressed the feeling

that they would like to have a more formal relationship between NCSBCS and themselves. We are both in the same endeavor, trying to achieve better codes, and I think that representation

with them in some form is highly desirable.

The Energy Standard has been reported on by the Conference Chairman. We did become

involved in June of last year; we had the opportunity to work with NBS in a joint Energy

Workshop in Washington.

Following that workshop, the S&E Committee requested that the Executive Committee

write a letter to NBS and request that a document be prepared. You know the process and the

progress that has been made up to this point

.

I have, in the last two months, been able to attend one session of ASHRAE as they were

working on the document. I wrote a letter to the Conference Chairman and told him that I came away from it both optimistic and pessimistic; if this was possible.

I was optimistic in that I felt we had some extremely talented people working on it, and

pessimistic in that I think the document may have a possibility of coming out less than

desirable, because there is a tremendous amount of pressure being placed on ASHRAE to

diminish the effect of it. I think that we have to continue to keep an eye on it.

We got into the American National Metric Council. If you have not considered what

impact a conversion from the English System to the Metric System is going to have on our

codes and things in which we are involved, you'd better give it some thought, because it

is going to drive not only our code people up the wall, but industry right along with them

or maybe preceding them to the top of it

.

We have taken a position, and have expressed it to the Executive Committee, on the

proposed National Fire Prevention Code that is being developed by NFPA. We did recommend

to the Executive Committee to call a special meeting of all the model code groups, NFPA and

others interested in fire codes. The purpose would be to provide the mechanism for gaining

the cooperation of all in production of a single fire prevention code that would settle the

fight between fire marshals and building officials.

We've also taken a position on OSHA's proposal on laboratory accreditation and made a recommendation to the Executive Committee. You know the status of that at the present time.

We did have several guest speakers during the year. Dick Stevens from NFPA talked to us about the construction of the NFPA Standards Format. We talked to Mel Green of ASME

who gave us a good presentation of what its Boiler Pressure Vessel Code development procedure

is and the structure of the organization. We had Ron Melott from NFPA who was crucified

when he came in to discuss the National Fire Protection Code.

Along with several other members of the Executive Committee, I had the opportunity of

attending the conference in Toronto, Canada, in October of last year in which we had interface with the Canadian people who are our counterparts there.

44
I think that there is an avenue here that we. need to more fully explore since the

borders no longer restrict the movement of materials or finished products; and, they are'

shipping a lot of things here, and our people &re shipping a lot of things there.

It was a two-day conference and I think our Conference Chairman will agree that we were

greeted and treated most courteously. By the way, if you have ever been met at an airport

by a full dressed Royal Canadian Mounted Police

MR. THURBER: I was.

'

MR. HENKE: —and not knowing who he was and all he said was, "Come with me."

(Laughter.)

'

MR. HENKE: Believe me, we went. All they really did was escort us on through

Customs, and I think he just kind of waved as we walked through. Lord knows what we could

have taken into the country with us

.

Mr. Chairman, that is the substance of the report and I would submit it for consideration of the Conference at this time.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: You have heard the report. Do we have a motion on acceptance?

MR. ROWLAND: So move.

MR. BROWNRIGG: Second.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Comments are open.

MR. RENICK: On page 6 of the Report, the last paragraph dealing with MCSC which

states, "BOCA has taken the position that all standards and recommended practices referenced

in their code must be included."

This was a misunderstanding with the BOCA staff, but it has been resolved and we are all

working together in resolving the standard issues. I just wanted to tnake that clear, that

there is no hang-up any more in that regard.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Thank you very much. Any other comments?

(No response.)

MR. HENKE: That could be deleted from the report if you want.

FROM THE FLOOR: On that particular item, is it appropriate that we could recommend

that the paragraph be deleted because it really is not pertinent?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: On my copy I just scratched it out.

MR. HENKE: It's page 6, the last statement beginning, "BOCA..."

CHAIRJ'IAN CABELUS: It reads, "BOCA has taken the position that all standards and

recommended practices referenced in their code must be included," and we will remove that.

MR. HENKE: Not unless we have a motion to do it.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: All right. We'll have to have a motion to amend.

MR. HENKE: I will make the motion—an amendment to the motion that this statement be

deleted from the body of the report.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Is there a second?

MR. MEYER: Second.

45
CHAIRMAN CABELUS: If not, we are voting on the amendment. All in favor?

(Voting.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Opposed?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: The motion to delete is carried. Now, we will vote on the acceptance

of the report. There was a motion made and a second. We've had comment. Is there any more

comment on the full report?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I call for a vote. All in favor?

(Voting.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Opposed?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS : Now you have a report that is accepted with that deletion.

MR. ROWLAND: Did you make that announcement about returning those forms?

MR. HENKE: Thank you. I didn't. If I may, before we go ahead, one further comment.

One of the activities we have been working on was a submission from all the States. We even sent envelopes and the works. So far, 13 States have complied with it, and it is essential that we receive it so the Committeee can finish its work.

MR. ROl-JLAND: That is on the request as to how you reference standards, where you get

them, and how you enforce the code, if you recall.

MR. HENKE: What we are trying to do is to get away from your having to have a supply

of all these standards on hand. If we can do it by reference, this should suffice, but we need to know how the States are doing it.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: We will ask Glen Swenson to come up and give his report on the

Education and Qualification Committee.

PRESENTATION OF THE REPORT OF THE

EDUCATION AND QUALIFICATION COMMITTEE

MR. SWENSON: Mr. Chairman, colleagues, first, I'd like to introduce our Committee.

The Vice-chairman is John Wenning of Wisconsin who is here; Chuck Talmage of Texas served as Secretary. Charles Dinezio of Massachusetts, Delegate Member and Dave McNeill of New Mexico

is a Delegate Member.

The Associate Members are Jim Brennan of HUD. He's been with us during this session.

Bob O'Bannon representing ICBO also is here. Bill Vasvary, SBCC, is here. Ottmar Becker

representing BOCA.

The Affiliate Members are Professor Lyman Francis representing ECPD; A. C. Breckenridge

,

representing AGC; Jim Dowling representing AIA; Dana Hannan, representing CEC; and

Bob Dikkers of NBS who has rendered excellent Secretariat service.

I 46
Following Ken's precedent, I will not read the entire report. I hope you all have

copies so that you can study it when you have adequate time. Following the usual procedures,

the Education and Qualification Committee worked on a set of tasks and these tasks are listed for you on the second page of the report.

The Committee met at the various regional areas which have been mentioned previously,

and also in Colorado Springs, Colorado, on July 18. In order to really understand the

report and the activities of this year, we included with the report a brief preface which

went back to the previous year and recalled a number of things with which most of you are familiar

In surveying the tasks which the E&Q Committee had set for itself, we ran into some enormous logistical problems. Some of the accomplishments we had set for ourselves involved the collection of mountainous data, and then utilizing these data in some meaningful

fashion, and in looking at ways to accomplish this.

We explored and investigated a number of organizations and finally, in 1972, more or less zeroed in on the National Academy of Code Administration as an organization that

appeared to offer possibilities.

In December of 1972, we held a symposium here in Austin, in this room I might add,

partly sponsored by the E&O Committee and participated in by the National Academy of Code

Administration.

Following that, however, the E&Q Committee felt that while the National Academy of

Code Administration was certainly a worthwhile organization and deserved our commendation,

the E&Q Committee could not fully endorse it as a functionary in what we had in mind. We

felt it was not sufficiently broadly representative in its structure.

We felt this way primarily because, at that time, the structure of the organization

did not include representation from ICBO or SBCC. The E&Q Committee had advised the

Executive Committee of its position to the effect that NACA was not sufficiently broadly

representative and made some suggestions for changes if it was to receive endorsement of

NCSBCS.

Most of you will recall, apart from last year, that there was an offer made by the

representative of NACA, which happened to be John Wishart , wherein NACA offered to re- structure the Academy along the lines that had been suggested by NCSBCS.

So that brings us up to the commencement of this operational year. During this year, we devoted considerable time and thought to the matter of the restructuring of the National

Academy and working with it.

As a result of a number of meetings, the Academy was restructured along the lines

suggested by NCSBCS which basically were that the Academy shall be governed by, in effect,

an Executive Committee which would include two members from ICBO, two members from SBCC,

two members from BOCA and two members from NCSBCS.

Then, it was also suggested that the restructuring include representation from the

fields of architecture, engineering, public management, education and construction.

In the restructuring, the representation from ICBO, SBCC, BOCA and NCSBCS was taken

care of. They did not formally provide for the other fields. It was a technical matter

in selecting its Executive Committee.

It had provided for that representation to the extent that we feel is adequate, and we believe that this is a significant breakthrough. Charles Dinezio of Massachusetts and

I were designated to represent NCSBCS on the Executive Committee of ' NACA, and so that's

where we now stand.

47
We see the National Academy as participating very heavily in Items C and t) of the

tasks of the E&Q Committee; developing model programs, maintaining up-to-date compilations of education and training programs, and so on.

We feel that this is a significant step forward in this area. Our Committee feels

particularly satisfied because we think that we have served as a catalyst to do something

that has been needed for a long time. Specifically, I'm talking about bringing the three

model code groups together, and we certainly think the CABO organization deserves a lot of

credit for its increased cooperation; and, we are pleased to feel that we have had something to do with this, promoting it through the activities pertaining to the National

Academy. We feel very hopeful in that respect.

Also, as Chairman Cabelus mentioned, we have been looking at what appears to be a promising concept for evaluating the qualifications of code enforcement people.

We're talking now about the concept of a rating ranging from zero to 100. I won't

go into the details, but obviously, we need much more than a Concept. We need a lot of

diligent and intensive work to implement this and make it a useful tool.

We are looking now at a means of accomplishing this. Some actions have been taken

and more will be taken to see if the necessary expertise and manpower can be assembled to,

in effect, flush out this skeleton which has been described, and provide something that

will be of use to the NCSBCS and other interested code organizations.

Also, the matter of model legislation has been mentioned. The model act that did not

receive endorsement by the Council of State Governments was the Model Registration of

Code Enforcement Officers Act, and that is something that we suggest should be rectified.

The E&Q Committee is suggesting that efforts to pursue this matter be reactivated;

that a task force be organized to study the act, modify it and, hopefully, to achieve an approval of the Council of State Governments after this has been done.

The previous submittal apparently was not accompanied by sufficient information as

to convince the legislators that adoption would be proper at that time. We hope, with

more complete information, and knowledge, and some modifications of the document, that it

will be adopted.

We, of the Education and Qualification Committee, have appreciated the cooperation of

the rest of the membership of the NCSBCS and the support and help of Chairman Cabelus

and the Executive Committee, We feel optimistic for the future.

We feel that what has been done is significant and that much more can be accomplished.

We feel that following through the actions that are being taken now can be very meaningful to the membership of NCSBCS in the future. With that, Mr. Chairman, I move adoption

of the report.

MR. THURBER: Second.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: The motion has been made and seconded to adopt the Report of the

Education and Qualification Committee. Are there any comments on this?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: If not, all in favor?

(Voting.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Opposed?

48
(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: It's carried. We will go on to the Report of the Management and

Regulatory Procedures Committee, Charles Betts.

PRESENTATION OF THE REPORT OF THE

MANAGEMENT AND REGULATORY PROCEDURES COMMITTEE

MR. BETTS: This Committee met four times during the year at the regular quarterly

meetings. We have four Delegate/State Members on the Committee besides myself. Harry Baker

from Oregon, Jane Heron from Illinois, who is also our very efficient Secretary and we appreciate her input to our Committee, Delmont Thurber from Montana and Milton Duke from

New York.

If any of the delegates are not on a committee and are interested in this phase of the

program, we would like to have you volunteer. I can use a couple more committee members.

If you are interested, get in touch with me. We'd love to have you.

We did not accomplish all of the goals which we started out to. It takes time to do

all of these things. We just didn't get them all done, so I would like to report on those

which we did complete.

The Uniform Building Permit Application Form, which is Item Number 1, has been distributed to every permit-issuing agency in the State of Indiana. We now are starting to get

replies back from that distribution and its use from the various jurisdictions. From this,

hopefully, we will come up with a Uniform Permit Application that all of us can use. That

may or may not be possible.

We are going to get some input from the material which was provided to us by the Bureau

of the Census. The Uniform Permit Application Form, which it has recommended, which it is

using, and on which our Committee also took action, is to provide in all building permit

applications that the material which was in that application is the kind of material which

we ought to have on an application and from which we can derive information that would be

helpful in the ongoing process of code enforcement and implementation.

Item Number 2, Fire Data and Reporting. All of you, I think, are aware that we provided

to the governors and members of the Conference copies of the NFPA Fire Reporting System.

Some States are using them and some are not. If it's like my State, you take it over

to the fire marshal and that's about as far as it goes. We get all kinds of excuses as to

why we don't get reports on fires, and I'm sure you do, too.

In our State, we have a situation which may or may not be the same as other States. We

find that our volunteer firemen are more prevalent; there are more of them than the paid

firemen. To get anything out of a volunteer is like pulling teeth out of an elephant's

mouth

So we really don't have much information that has come back to us, at least on this

particular program.

Item Number 3, the State Building Code and Regulatory Programs, and Item Number 4,

Model Informational Documentation. These two items we did not get to this year will be

considered next year and, I assume, we will have the same committee structure.

Item Number 5, Computer-Based Systems for Building Codes and their Administration. I am on the American Institute of Architects' Codes and Standards Committee and also its

Advisory Committee for a computer-based system which they are now working on.

49

r
We do not have a report on the progress up to this point, but I am going to be a little

critical of my own profession. I think they are moving too slow, and I am not sure what

they are doing.

I get the impression during the meetings that they are not sure that they know what they

are doing, but we'll just let that drop there.

(Laughter.)

Are there any questions or comments from the Floor? I'll try to answer them if there

are

.

(No response.)

MR. BETTS: Well, I'm not sure really what we are doing, let me put it that way. Are

there any questions or comments?

(No response.)

MR. BETTS: Don't forget. I'm looking for a couple more members on my Committee. If

you want to volunteer, I'll be most happy to have you. That's about the extent of my report.

MR.. ROWLAND: Do you want to include the minutes of your meeting of yesterday, and

address the topic which probably should be on the agenda with regard to the Energy Model

Legislation so that delegate body can take action on it? It's buried under 8 and 9.

MR. BETTS: All right. Item Number 8 in the minutes of our meeting the other day which,

I assume, will be available to everyone as the energy situation will concern all of us.

Item Number 8, on page 3. I presented the Model Building Energy Code Act, prepared in

response to requests made by various States. Substantial concern was raised regarding the

impact of distribution of such a document and its publication by the Council of State

Governments

.

Several potential problems were identified: (1) that NCSBCS endorsement or distribution

might encourage enactment of discrete energy conservation legislation where no State building code exists; (2) that laws patterned after this model might be enacted, creating

competing building regulatory agencies where a State code is in operation, and at the local

level, the State level, or between State and local, a builder might have to obtain two

separate and possibly conflicting plan reviews.

Mr. Duke pointed out that the existing Model State Building Code Act includes energy

conservation as an objective and function of State building codes, and that this comprehensive approach has been adopted by NCSBCS.

What we really are saying here is that we are suggesting that you amend your building

code act to include energy, rather than have a separate entity developed through legislation in your State. It could cause problems for those of you who are in the building

regulatory system.

You may end up, as I have indicated here, with the possibility of a conflict between

the two agencies. We are very much concerned that we don't get such a conflict and, therefore, any legislation which you may need in your State should be based on the premise that

the building division will have authority on the energy documents and the enforcement of

the energy requirements.

Do I need to read the rest of this?

MS. HERON: Go to the bottom of page 4 and you might read A, B, and C, and then on page 5 , Number 9

.

50
MR. BETTS: Jane Heron moved that the Committee recommend to the Executive Committee

that before any distribution of this document, a cover letter or a revised introduction to

the act be prepared, addressing itself to potential problems identified by the M&RP Committee

that might result from separate enactment, and that such a letter emphasize the following

points: (A) the importance of incorporating energy conservation in building into a State

building code; (B) the importance of placing the total responsibility for building regulation, including energy in one agency; (C) the problems generated by creating a State

energy-related building regulatory agency in addition to, and possibly in conflict with,

the existing local building department.

That was the motion and it was passed. It was the sense of the Committee that NCSBCS

should go on record as recommending a simple amendment to the building act to include

energy conservation or adoption of a comprehensive State building code including energy

conservation, rather than separate legislation.

Lacking time for a formal review of the annual report, it was agreed that the comments

would be made informally to the Chairman. If you have any comments on this, please let me

know.

Now, some of you may need to have an interpretation of your building code act. We had

a situation in our State where the first opinion we got from our Attorney General was that we had the authority, and then about four weeks later he came along with another opinion and

reversed himself.

I hope you don't have that problem and have to start all over again. Now, we have to

go back to the legislature to get the authority to enforce the energy requirements. Does

anyone have a question or comment on this subject?

(No response.)

Mr. Chairman, I think' that's it. I do want to again remind you that I would like to

have a couple more members on my Committee.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Thank you, Charles.

MR. THURBER: I move the adoption of his report.

MR. SMITTLE: Second.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Any comment or discussion?

MR. ROWLAND: Now, if I interpret this right, your approval of the report as a delegate

body is an instruction to the Secretariat that we not proceed with a separate suggested

state legislation to the Council of State Governments.

I also interpret from the report, however, that the delegate body can receive information

from us with regard to what has been done or any information that they could feed into

their governor, but I would hope that somehow we got the message that any document requested

by your governor may go back through you so that you can control it.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: That's right.

MR. ROWLAND: Or, at least you get a copy of the responses so that you are put into

the pipeline because we are getting direct letters that Ed Rovner, who is now with the

National Governor's Conference, shoots out to us.

On most of those letters, we've always had a copy back to you when it's answered so you

know who gets what, and then it will be up to you to run back and cover the corner.

51
MR. BETTS: I think this is so important. If you do have any correspondence on this

subject that might pertain to what the Governor seems to be doing over there and we may

not know about, I think it would be very helpful for us to know what you are doing. The

Governor may know what we are doing but maybe one of his aides doesn't.

HR. ROWLAND: So watch your mail. If you are getting carbons of letters that appear

to go to the Governor on anything concerning energy, your responsibility is to pick up the

ball; otherwise, he may be going with a separate energy bill and setting up a competitive

agency. We'll try to convey that in correspondence following the meeting.

MR. HAMILTON: I believe it was recommended to us yesterday by the ASHRAE representative

that we hesitate or hold off on the promotion of legislation regarding energy until that

standard is completed. Am I right?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: But this is a different thing entirely.

MR. HAMILTON: I'm a little confused.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Well, maybe I can clarify it for you. What we are saying is, that

instead of coming up with the whole act as we did with the Model State Building Code Act

and the Manufactured Building Act and so forth, just take your State building code act and

amend it to include energy. In other words, you are putting it into the building regulatory office instead of some other place.

MR. BETTS: What we are saying is you have two different subjects. One is the energy

criteria itself. That is a different thing, and we don't have it yet. All we are saying now is to get your organization into shape so that you control it as a building official.

MR. RO^-TLAND: One other reason that was also suggested as why not to go ahead with this

is that every State Legislator in the United States receives a copy of those bound documents.

Every State Legislator wants to introduce some legislation. If he found a separate

one on energy, you wouldn't know that he was introducing it and then you would have a battle.

MR. BETTS: As I say, we don't want you to do that because that fouls us up.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: In response, you know they always say, "Let Uncle do it," or "Uncle

will do it." Now, we are saying let the private sector do it, so they better deliver.

They have hollered long and now they have their chance. Are there any other comments?

MR. BETTS: One more. That is, I guarantee to you that if you do not take some action

on this subject soon and if you let it go too long, you are going to lose it.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Now, we'll call for vote on it. All in favor?

(Voting.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Opposed?

(No response.)

CHAIR>tAN CABELUS: It's carried. We have moved along and we have new business next on the agenda, I don't know of any really pressing new business. There may be something that

I am not aware of.

We have the election of officers, and I just would like a consensus here. Should we

go through the noon hour just so you will have more time this afternoon?

(The audience responded.)

52
CHAI^JIAN CABELTIS: ri:;ht. Then we will not adjourn for lunch now. Let's try to go

right on through. We will open under new business. Erik Thorne, you now can say what you

want to say.

MR. THORNE: I wish at this time that the Chair would give a good vote of thanks to the

respective Chairmen of the committees who have just issued these very excellent reports. I think they deserve a vote of thanks.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I think what we are doing is proposing a motion here that the entire

Conference give a vote of thanks to our Chairmen and their committees

This may be a little unusual, but I would like to have our Chairmen stand up first,

please

(The Chairmen of the committees stood.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Now, stay up. Now, the committees that worked with you, you please

stand up; all of the members who are here.

(Members of the committees stood up.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Now, please remain standing. Now, I want everybody who has ever worked on a NCSBCS committee to stand up; any of you people who have been on the advisory

groups or on any kind of a committee at all that has worked with NCSBCS.

(Numerous other members stood up.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Well, that's the way I like it. All I can say is there is the work

for us

(Applause .

)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: It goes without saying, I think this is going to be, as I said in

my report, a fruitful year. No one can get up here and do the job without the people who

do the work. To my Committee Chairmen and to all of you, I thank you.

Del, do you want to take over on the elections? The Chairman-Elect will come over and

take up the Chair for this segment.

MR. THURBER: Gentlemen, we are going to move along here. Our next item on the agenda

will be the elections, and I will proceed in the best manner that I know how and explain to

you as we go along how it is done.

First of all, we will take up the matter of the Regional Chairmen. At this time, I would like to ask each present Regional Chairman to report on the new Regional Chairman as elected this morning at the breakfast.

The one Regional Chairman who has one more year to go, God rest his merry soul, is

Ken Henke. He has another year as Chairman of the Midwestern Region, so his position is

not vulnerable.

I would like to have Sutton Mullen report on the Regional Chairman as elected from the

Southern Region, please.

MR. MULLEN: The Southern Region has elected Mr. Charles Talmage of Texas as its

Chairman.
MR. THURBER: From the Northeastern Region, will the delegate from Massachusetts please

report on that Regional Chairman.

MR. RENICK: Mr. Dinezio from Massachusetts was , reelected to serve a full two-year term

as Northeastern Regional Chairman.

MR. THURBER: All right. That is a two-year term for the Southern Region also. Right?

MR. MULLEN: Right.

MR. THURBER: I will report to you that Mr. Harry Baker from Oregon was elected to serve out the one-year remaining in my term as Western Regional Chairman which I waived on moving up to National Chairman.

1 would ask for a motion from the Conference to accept and approve these elections.

May I have the motion?

IIR. BETTS: I move.

MR. THURBER: Charles Betts moved.

MR. THORNE: Second.

!1R. THURBER: All in favor of approving the Regional Chairmen as elected this morning

signify by "I",

(Voting.)

MR. THURBER: Opposed?

(No response.)

MR. THURBER: So carried. Now we go into the Executive Committee Members-at-Large

These Executive Committee Members-at-Large are elected from the delegate body like it says,

at-large.

We have Mr. Glen Swenson's two-year term expiring. Mr. Jim Hick's term has one year

left to run, but Mr. Hicks is not on the Executive Committee as of right now. Mr. Hicks is no longer, as I understand it, the delegate from California and that is why he leaves a one-year term. Mr. Charles Betts' two-year term is expiring.

Now we have a situation here on these terms. The two two-year terms and the one oneyear term will be a little difficult to do.

If I might take the prerogative of the Chair, we will now entertain nominations for the

position of election to the Executive Committee Members-at-Large.

If it will be all right, much the same as we did last year, the two top vote getters,

take the two two-year terms and the third takes the one-year term.

MR. THORNE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to place the name of Glen Swenson from Utah into

nomination for a two-year term of office,

MR. THURBER: Mr. Glen Swenson has been nominated for a two-year term of office.

i>IR. HENKE: Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to put into nomination the name of an individual who comes from the Hoqsier State who has given a great service to this organization. I consider him a very good friend, and I appreciate his counseling and his knowledge,

Mr. Charles Betts.

54
MR. THURBER: Mr. Charles Betts has been nominated.

MR. RENICK: We would like to put into the nomination Mr. Robert Frambach, the delegate

from Pennsylvania,

MR. THURBER: Mr. Robert Frambach has been nominated.

M. BAKER: Mr. Chairman, I would like to nominate Mr. Russell H. Bahr from the State

of California for the one-year unexpired term of Mr. Jim Hicks.

MR. THURBER: Mr. Bahr has been nominated.

MR. MULLEN: I wish to nominate Mr. Edward Kimsey of Tennessee. Mr. Kimsey can attend

the meetings.

I'd. THURBER: Mr. Kimsey of Tennessee has been nominated. I'd like to clarify one

thing. You have two two-year terms and one one-year term. If it behooves you and if you

don't get into difficulties and jump down my throat, I will repeat, I will suggest that the

two top vote getters take the two two-year terms and the third man take the one-year term.

Is this satisfactory with the delegates?

FROM THE FLOOR: Would it be appropriate that we make a motion so that it will be in

effect?

MR. THURBER: I would suggest that be in effect.

FROM THE FLOOR: I so move.

MR. BROWNRIGG: I second.

MR. THURBER: All those that approve of that motion signify by the usual "I".

(Voting.)

MR. THURBER: Any opposed?

(No response.)

MR. BULLOCK: I move the nominations be closed.

MR. SMITTLE: Second.

MR. THURBER: It's been moved and seconded for nominations to be closed. All those

in favor signify by the usual "I". ,

(Voting.)

MR. THURBER: Opposed?

(No response.)

MR. THURBER: We now have five candidates for the offices of Executive Committee

Members-at-Large. Now, we'll get some ballots passed out by Brother Mahaffey over there

and we have to appoint about three tellers, I think. Who wants to tell?

MR. BETTS: One of those nominations was for a one-year term?

55
MR. THURBER: Yes. He made a motion that the third man take it. Now, we'll put the names up here on the board and, after they are put up by Gene Rowland, I suggest that you

vote for three people. The top three people will be Executive Committee Members-at-Large

.

The two top guys being two two-year terms and the third guy will be the one-year term.

Satisfactory? Is that all right with you, gentlemen?

(From the floor, "Sure.")

HR. THURBER: They are writing them up there now.

(Brief delay.)

MR. THURBER: Now, you have your nominees; Swenson from Utah, Betts from Indiana,

Frambach from Pennsylvania, Bahr from California and Kimsey from Tennessee. Now, only

delegates may vote, please. Don't give us 55 votes up here for these delegates.

(Laughter.

)

MR. THURBER: The Chairman cannot vote except in the case of a tie. He may then vote;

delegates and proxies can vote.

(Brief delay.)

MR. THURBER: I'd like to tell you a little bit about next year's NEWSLETTER. The

last issue that we had was a little bit skimpy, as you know, because we didn't have the input

from the Conference.

Now, I don't know exactly where the input is going to go at this particular moment, but we would like to have a good NEWSLETTER again next year, so let's get that stuff in.

The next issue will probably have to come to me at Box 617 in the great State of

Montana in the town of Great Falls. I will forward it to whoever is going to get it. The

zip code is 59403. We have a couple of articles about Cabelus going in next time.

(Laughter.

)

By the way, I am looking for an editor for the NEWSLETTER, man or woman. If I get a good volunteer to take that NEWSLETTER, I'll award it fast.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: After we are wound up here, we want volunteers to throw the incoming

Chairman into the pool.

(Laughter.

)

While we're killing time, I'll tell you that the information is down at the desk for

where to meet the bus ' and so on to go to the Banquet tonight.

MR. THURBER: The results of your ballots, ladies and gentlemen. One two-year term

for Executive Committee Member-at-Large goes to Mr. Charles Betts of Indiana.

The second two-year term goes to Mr. Glen Swenson from Utah and the one-year term is

to Mr. Edward Kimsey of Tennessee. Let's give those gentlemen a hand.

(Applause.)

MR. THURBER: Now, let's ask them to stand up. Let's see those three fellows stand up.

(Two gentlemen stood up.)

MR. THURBER: Along with the Regional Chairmen.

56
(The Regional Chairmen also stood up.)

MR. MULLEN: In fairness to Mr. Kimsey, he is very sorry that he had to leave, but

he had a long-standing engagement to speak in Memphis tonight and he could not stay.

MR. THURBER: I have been asked for an explanation of the other position on the

Executive Committee and I will give you that explanation. There is a one-year unexpired

term of David McNeill of New Mexico. He still has one year to serve on the Executive

Committee

.

He has had problems recently and has assured some of the delegates here, particularly

his own proxy that he wishes to continue on the Executive Committee, and will be in attend- ance beginning with the first Executive Committee session of the new year. We will honor

that suggestion if it is all right with you. If at that time he says he cannot serve any

longer, we will accept that and replace him under the Constitutional Bylaws of this

Conference. If this satisfies you, then I will get off the podium. Does anybody have any

comments on that?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: We are still under new business. Is there any other new business?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: If not, we are going on to the Chairman's suggestions or recom- mendations and what he feels should be pursued by the Conference commencing with the new

administration.

PRESENTATION OF CHAIRMAN'S SUGGESTIONS

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I want you to know that our last annual conference was held in

Connecticut which is the Northeastern Region. This one here in Texas is the Southern

Region

The next annual meeting is going to be in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and the one following

that will be in Indianapolis, Indiana.

MR. BETTS: Not Indianapolis. It's South Bend. We're going to have a tour of the

steel mills and it's going to be great. I've got some guys working on it.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I will say this to you, that tomorrow morning, when your new National Chairman and your new Executive Committee convenes, they will be open for invitations for the Annual Conference for 1977.

When I get through with this particular report I have. Gene Rowland will give you

some information on the banquet tonight before we leave.

I have been very, very happy with the reception that we have had here in Texas, and

I just want to extend my personal thanks to the people from this fine State.

Now, acting on the resolve of the NCSBCS to form a more effective national organization for bringing about a rational, practical solution to the need for a truly interstate

system of building regulations, the following action recommendations are offered as a creative response by the States to the "New Federalism" and I urge that the following be

supported.

One , general . It is believed that no proposition concerned with the above can be

successfully carried out without a more complete utilization of the facilities and personnel of the NBS Center for Building Technology. It is further believed that the other

Federal agencies concerned with building regulations must also be involved in this more

57
intensive utilization of NBS. Only through the development of a better working mechanism

involving State and Federal regulatory agencies and the NBS, aimed at cooperatively

sponsoring the evolution of interstate building regulations, can a truly national system

be perfected. To carry out these general aims, the following specific recommendations

are offered.

Two, Specific . The NCSBCS should immediately enter into negotiations with the NBS to

establish a basis for a State-supported Research Associate program.

This program would have the following highlights. NCSBCS would select and pay the

salary of an Executive Secretary who would be stationed at the NBS/CBT. A five-year plan

would need to be established that would require NBS to supply space and the secretarialtype services, including mailing, needed with a planned program, requiring NCSBCS to gradually assume the costs of all secretarial support services, but not space, needed for the

functioning of the new NCSBCS.

The Executive Secretary would Immediately begin to develop the larger State-Federal

building regulatory standards program with the following salient points.

One, the Center for Building Technology Standards Council membership —and this is a group that has already befen established and is there—be expanded to include the NCSBCS

Executive Secretary, and its objectives be aimed more at the development of needed regulatory standards.

Two, the other interested Federal agencies be contacted with the idea of joining the

NCSBCS regulatory standards development program. Arrangements with the NBS/CBT be con- cluded so as to further expand the CBT Standards Council so as to include representatives

from each of the participating Federal agencies.

Three, to utilize NCSBCS S&E Committee to develop an overall long-range building

regulatory standards program, determining how to incorporate the standards emanating from

the Federal-State-NBS standards development activities into a truly interstate regulatory

standards program. This function to be carried on knowing that the Federal-State development program would be engaged in flushing out the S&E programs.

Four, utilize the NCSBCS Management and Regulatory Procedures Committee to develop

the evaluation procedures and program required to assure interstate reciprocity.

Five, utilize the Reciprocity Committee as a problem identification forum and as the nucleus of a standards distribution center, responsible for developing explanatory

symposiums regarding new editions of standards.

Six, involve the participating Federal agencies in the support of the research

needed to reach the standards objectives identified by the expanded CBT Standards Council.

Seven, require NBS—and I say require —to establish and maintain a special

regulatory standards service unit, composed of standards development engineers responsible

for assembling drafts of regulatory standards identified by the CBT Standards Council.

Eight, aim for the evolvement of a complete set of building regulatory standards, by

occupancy, by 1980. Those are my recommendations to the NCSBCS.

I have copies of this. I know some of these thoughts may be new, they may be

shattering to the thinking of some, but I want you to read carefully what I have there

and really digest what I am saying.

While I think NCSBCS has become of stature, we are going to seek our own Executive

Secretary. We know it is a fact of life that we have to live with NBS, and we have to live

with HUD, and we have to live with HEW, and we have to live with all the other Federal

agencies, OSHA and all the rest.

58
There is only one way that we ever get anything that we want and that's by

coiiununication and we want direct input, and we want them to understand what we are after.

We want to understand what they want to do and we want to be able to criticize, and we

also want to be able to say to NBS, "Your task is normally to help other governmental

agencies and private agencies and we are saying now that this is where we want to be

helped."

I think we are big enough to do this; at least, I hope so. Is there any other new

business?

MR. SWENSON: I would like to offer the motion that this body go on record as commending Bernard Cabelus for his dedicated and effective service in his capacity as National Chairman of NCSBCS.

MR. THURBER: I second the motion.

MR. ROT-JLAND: Does the National Chairman-Elect want to take the Chair?

MR. THURBER: The motion is made and seconded that we give Bernie the business.

All those in favor signify by the usual "I."

(Voting.)

MR. THURBER: Opposed?

(No response.)

MR. THURBER: It's so ordered.

(Applause .

)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Thank you.

MR. ROWLAND: Del Thurber would like to see the new Executive Committee up here for

a few minutes right after we adjourn. Tonight is our final banquet dinner. We want

everybody, of course, to attend.

I am going to ask the Coordinator who has really done a lot of leg work to make this

Conference possible, Sandra Berry, to tell us what we are going to be doing. Would

you please come up?

MRS. BERRY: The buses are going to be in front of the restaurant at 6:00 o'clock.

I hope you can all be there. We are going to the Feed Lot Restaurant. It is a very

interesting restaurant and I think you all will enjoy it.

MR. JUDGE: One of the things I expected to hear some discussion on here at this

meeting, and I understand was discussed in your committee meeting this morning, was how

NCSBCS plans to fund its own Executive Secretary.

Most of us in the private sector are interested in hearing something about this.

We've heard all kinds of rumors and I gather that subject was discussed this

morning. Is there going to be any discussion of that in front of this open meeting?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Perhaps a few words on this are in order. Well, if it isn't out

of order to advise a little bit about what is contemplated. We have written a letter

to Dr. Roberts because the National Bureau of Standards does want to phase out the

Executive Secretariat.

59
We did sanction the Executive Committee to go to Washington in July to spend as much time as necessary, be it a day, two, three, four or five. We have recommended that

they bring a couple of States' Attorneys General along with. them, and it looks very much

as if we will have some of the Department of Commerce's attorneys to tell us how we can

set up our Secretariat and collect monies, and do it legally so that there could be no conflict with our Bylaws.

We are going to—I say we, because as Immediate Past National Chairman, I'll be a member of the Executive Committee and all of the Committee will be there.

Then, when we find out and develop this system, and find out the way we are going to

move, we are going to call a special meeting of the NCSBCS, We will notify the delegates ahead of time through the mail of the actions and proposals. They will have to

vote on the acceptance of the recommendations of the Executive Committee.

At that time, there will be more discussion on assessments and other methods of

making money. We know for the first two or three years, they are going to be lean.

If we start with a good Executive Secretary, we are in great shape. As far as travel, we are not going to finance the travel of everybody to all our meetings; we

can't for the first two or three years.

There has been a lot of research, there are many good ideas that have been set

forth and if we can implement any of them, the day may well come when we may be able to

sponsor all your expenses, even to the Annual Conferences, at least hopefully so.

It is very possible that we will be more than self-sustaining. This is our hope

and this is our desire. We have a lot of thoughts. We welcome any input. We are going

to welcome comments, and whatever we come up with, the delegates certainly are going to

be kept informed. Prior to the special meeting of the NCSBCS, you will have plenty

of warning and paperwork to let you know just why you are coming. You will have to vote

in order to make anything that the Executive Committee decides on, legal and binding.

MR. JUDGE: Let me ask one other thing. At the Executive Committee meeting yesterday, I heard almost everything you said. Was it not said that it is hoped that your

selection of an Executive Secretary would be wound up not later than the end of the

month of July?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: No. We said our meeting to go over all this, all our investigation on what to do and how to move, would be held by no later than the end of July.

MR. JUDGE: So you will probably continue through the rest of this Conference year

as you now are?

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: We reaffirmed Gene Rowland's role as Executive Secretary for the

ensuing year, yes.

MR. JUDGE: All right. Thank you.

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Are there any further questions in regard to this?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: Is there any other new business?

(No response.)

CHAIRMAN CABELUS: I do have copies of the report that I made.

I declare this Conference adjourned.

(I'Jhereupon the record was closed.)

60
ATTENDEES

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATES ON BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS

7TH ANNUAL MEETING

April 28 - May 3, 1974

Austin, Texas

DELEGATE AND STATE ITT^ERS

ALASKA

Mr. Ronald A. Hendrie

State Fire Marshal

Pouch N

Juneau, Alaska 99801

ARIZONA

Mr. Erik V. Thorne

Director, Division of Building Codes

1645 West Jefferson

Phoenix, Arizona 85007

CALIFORNIA

Mr. Russell R. Bahr

Codes & Standards Administrator II

Department of Housing and Community

Development

1500 5th - P'. 0. Box 1859

Sacramento, California 95809

Mr. James M. Hicks, Jr.

Chief, Division of Research & Assistance

California Department of Housing and

Community Development

455 Capitol Mall, Suite 385

Sacramento, California 95814

COLORADO

Mr. John Brock

Residential Construction Engineer

Colorado Division of Housing

1575 Sherman Street

Denver, Colorado 80203

CONNECTICUT

Mr. Bernard E. Cabelus

?tate Building Inspector

Public Works Department

525 State Office Building

Hartford, Connecticut 06115

FLORIDA

Mr. M. A. Yelvington

Administrator, Factory- Built Housing

Florida Department of Community Affairs

2571 Executive Center Circle, E. Tallahassee, Florida 32301

GEORGIA

Mr. George H. Bullock

Chairman, State Building Administrative

Board

180 Hunnicutt Drive

Athens, Georgia 30601

Mr. James E. West

Environmental Technologist

Georgia Department of Human Resources

Housing Hygiene Unit

47 Trinity Avenue, Room 310-H

Atlanta, Georgia 30334

IDAHO

Mr . Clyde Likes

Director, State of Idaho Mobile Home

and Housing Division

506 N. 5th Annex 3 Boise, Idaho 83720

ILLINOIS

Mr. Jerry D. Sternstein

Chief, Office of Housing & Buildings

Department of Local Government Affairs

325 West Adams

Springfield, Illinois 62704

Ms. Jane Heron

Office of Housing & Buildings

Department of Local Government Affairs

160 N. LaSalle

Chicago, Illinois 60601

61
Mr. Jon D. Anderson

Research Architect

Illinois Capital Development Board

705 State Office Building

Springfield, Illinois 62706

Mr. Robert L. Wheatley

Chief, Division of General Sanitation

Illinois Department of Public Health

535 W. Jefferson Street

Springfield, Illinois 62761

INDIANA

Mr. Charles J. Betts

State Building Comniissioner

':13 North Senate Aven'i°, Toom 300

Inciianapol is , Indiana 46202

Mr . Vernon Eder

Director, Manufactured Building Division

215 North Senate Avenue

Indianapolis, Indiana 46202

IOWA

Mr. Kenneth C. Henke, Jr.

State Building Code Commissioner

523 E. TvTelfth

Des Moines, lovra 50319

LOUISIANA

Mr. Raymond B. Oliver

State Fire Marshal

106 State Office Building

325 Loyola Avenue

New Orleans, Louisiana 70112

MAINE

Mr. J. Douglas Brownrigg

Manager, Inspection Division

Maine State Housing Authority

P. 0. Box 1450

Portland, Maine 04104

MARYLAND

Mr. Willard E. Bryant

Director, Codes Administration

2525 Riva Road

Annapolis, Maryland 21401

MASSACHUSETTS

Mr. Douglas W. Renick

Systems Methods Analyst

Department of Community Affairs

141 Milk Street

Boston, Massachusetts 02109

KANSAS MICHIGAN

Mr. Louis J. Krueger

Director, Division of Architectural

Services

10th & Harrison Streets

Topeka, Kansas 66612

Mr. Charles Beardmore

Chief, Review Section

Kansas Division of Architectural

Services

State Office Building

Topeka, Kansas 66612

KENTUCKY

Mr. Robert C. Hilprecht, P.E.

Executive Director

Construction Code Commission

Michigan Department of Labor

414 N. Larch Street

Lansing, Michigan 48926

MINNESOTA

Mr. Herbert W. Meyer, Director

State Building Inspector

408 Metro Square Building

7th and Robert Streets

St. Paul, Minnesota 55101

Mr. Richard Graff

Local Government Advisor

Kentucky Office of Local Government

5th Floor State National Bank Building

131 W. Main Street

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601

Mr. Frazier Faulconer

State Fire Marshal's Office

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601

MISSOURI

Mr. John A. Cooper

Director, Division of Design and

Construction

P. 0. Box 809

Jefferson City, Missouri 65101

MONTANA

Mr. Delmont C. Thurber

Chairman, Montana Building Codes

Advisory Board

3815 5th Avenue South

Great Falls, Montana 59405

62
NEBRASKA OHIO

Mr. Charles L. Brazie

State Capitol

P. 0. Box 94666

Lincoln, Nebraska 68509

NEVADA

Mr, Richard H. Bast

Deputy Fire Marshal

Mobile Home and Manufactured

Building Section

813 N. Plaza

Carson City, Nevada 89701

NEW JERSEY

Mr. William Connolly

Administrator, Bureau of Housing

Inspection

Department of Community Affairs

363 West State Street'

Trenton, New Jersey 08690

Mr. Chuck Tarr

Department of Community Affairs

363 West State Street

Trenton, New Jersey 08690

NEW KEXICC

Mr. Robert Berntsen

Assistant Administrator

P. 0. Drawer 5155

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501

NEW YORK

Mr. Louis S. Nielsen

Director, Housing & Building Codes

Bureau

Division of Housing & Community Renewal

Two World Trade Center

New York, New York 10047

Mr. Milton M. Duke

Assistant Commissioner

Planning & Construction

Division of Housing & Community Renewal

Two World Trade Center

New York, New York 10047

NORTH CAROLINA

Mr. Kern E. Church

Deputy Tomnilssioner

Engineering Building Codes Division

Department of Industry

P. 0. Box 26387

Raleigh, North Carolina 27611

Mr. Herbert P. Rosmarin

Architect/Code Coordinator

Division of Factory & Building Inspection

2323 W. 5th Avenue, Suite 2222

Columbus, Ohio 43204

OKLAHOMA

Mr. Allie 0. Isom

Engineer

State Board of Public Affairs

Room 306 State Capitol Building

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105

OREGON

Mr. Harry L. Baker

Administrator, Building Codes Division

Department of Commerce

325 13th Street, N.W., Suite 601

Salem, Oregon 97310

PENNSYLVANIA

Mr. Robert L. Frambach

Chief, Review Division

2221 Forster Street

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17125

Mr. Joseph J. Ferrer

Code Consultant, Commonwealth Department

of Community Affairs

P. 0. Box 155

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120

RHODE ISLAND

Mr. Frank Turano

Senior Code Specialist

Department of Community Affairs

150 Washington Street

Providence, Rhode Island 02908

SOUTH CAROLINA

Mr. L. P. Hamilton

Chief Engineer

Budget and Control Board

P. 0. Box 11333

Columbia, South Carolina 29211

TENNESSEE

Mr. Edward W. Kimsey

Director, The Department of Insurance

Division of Fire Prevention

202 Capitol Towers

Nashville, Tennessee 37219

63
TEXAS WEST VIRGINIA

Mr. Charles Talmage

Director, Division of Housing

Department of Community Affairs

P. 0. Box 13166, Capitol Station

Austin, Texas 78711

Mr. Walter Smittle, III

State Fire Marshal

1800 Washington Street

East Room 634, Building 3 Charleston, West Virginia 25305

Mr. Vernon Beringer

Department of Community Affairs

P. 0. Box 13166, Capitol Station

Austin, Texas 78712

WISCONSIN

Mr. John Wenning

Administrator, Industrial Safety and

Dr. Richard Furlong

Texas BMSTL

Buildings

201 E. Washington Avenue

Madison, Wisconsin 53702

Civil Engineering Department

University of Texas

Austin, Texas 78712

Mr. George Bullock

Wisconsin Department of Industry, Labor

Ms. Terry Leifeste

Office of the Governor

12428 Capitol Station

Austin, Texas 78711

and Human Relations

P. 0. Box 2209

Madison, Wisconsin 53711

UTAH

Mr. Glen R. Swenson

Director, Utah State Building Board

124 State Capitol

Salt Lake City, Utah 84114

VIRGIN ISLANDS

Mr. George B. Suarez, P.E.

Public Works Department

Anna's Hope

Christiansted - P. 0. Box //H St. Croix, Virgin Islands 00802

VIRGINIA

Mr. C. S. Mullen, Jr.

Chief Fire Marshal

Commonwealth of Virginia

P. 0. Box 1157

Richmond, Virginia 23209

Mr. Rex G. Early

Chief Engineer, IBU Section

Virginia State Fire Marshal's Division

521 Blanton Building, Box 1157

Richmond, Virginia 23209

WASHINGTON

Mr. John C. Hewitt

Supervisor, State of Washington Labor

and Industries

319 E. 4th Avenue, P. 0. Box 207

Olympia, Washington 98504

64
AFFILIATE MEMBERS

Mr. Thomas R. ArnoXd

President, T. R. Arnold & Associates

401 W. Bristol Street

Elkhart, Indiana 46514

Mr. G. 0. Atkinson

Group Manager, Standards Development

Division

American Society for Testing & Materials

1916 Race Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103

Mr. Douglas R. Betts

Fleetwood Enterprises

P. 0. Box 7638

Riverside, California 92503

Mr. Jack Bono

Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc.

333 Pfingsten Road

Northbrook, Illinois 60092

Mr. Dennis Bilow

SAFIREDOR

P. 0. Box 41, 2420 S. Tacoma Way

Tacoma, Washington 98412

Mr. David E. Brackett

Eastern Manager, Gypsum Association

11215 Oak Leaf Drive, #1710

Silver Spring, Maryland 20901

Mr. R. B. Buchan

Director, Building Code Department

National Forest Products Association

1619 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20036

Mr. Angelo W. Cacciola

Department Manager

United States Testing Company

1415 Park Avenue

Koboken, New Jersey 07030

Mr. George B. Cain

Regional Manager, Building Construction

Products

Copper Development Association

1011 High Ridge Road

Stamford, Connecticut 06905

Mr. T. H. Carter

Executive Director, International

Conference of Building Officials

5360 S. Workman Mill Road

Whittier, California 90601

Ms . Jan Jwouise Diggins

State Legislative Liaison Rep.

Recreational Vehicle Institute

2720 Des Plaines Avenue

Des Plaines, Illinois 60018

Mr. James R. Dowling

Director, Codes and Regulations Center

American Institute of Architects

1735 New York Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20006

Mr. Earl Ferguson

Director, Technical Services

Southeastern Mobile Home Institute

2810 New Spring Road, N.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30339

Mr. Phil M. Ferguson

National Society of Professional Engineers

3102 Beverly Road

Austin, Texas 78703

Mr. William E. Fitch

Market Development Supervisor

Owens Corning Fiberglas

Fiberglas Tower

Toledo, Ohio 43659

Mr. Thomas R. Flint

Director, Technical Services

American Plywood Association

1119 "A" Street

Tacoma, Washington 98401

Dr. Richard S. Frazer

Chairman of the Board

American Society of Building and

Construction Inspectors

Suite 500, 625 N. Michigan

Chicago, Illinois 60611

Mr. Ashby T. Gibbons

Manager, Codes and Specifications Section

Portland Cement Association

Old Orchard Road

Skokle, Illinois 60076

Mr. Mark Gleeson

Manager, Government Affairs Special

Proj ects

PPG Industries, Inc.

1 Gateway Center

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222

65
Mr. Francis E. Greenleaf

National Director, Standards and Legislati

Trailer Coach Association

3855 E. La Palma

Anaheim, California 92807

Mr. Charles A. Hagberg

Hagberg and Associates

Room 208, 131 W. Wilson

Madison, Wisconsin 57303

Mr. Richard P. Kuchnicki

National Association of Home Builders

1625 L Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

Mr. Daniel M. McGee

Chief Resident Engineer

American Iron and Steel Institute

150 East Forty-Second Street

New York, New York 10017

Mr. James R. Hardman

Administrator, Products Approvals Division

AMP Incorporated

Eisenhower Boulevard

P.O. Box 3608

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105

Mr. Paul K. Heilstedt

Technical Director

Building Officials and Code Administrators,

International

1313 E. 60th Street

Chicago, Illinois 60637

Mr. Charles L. Hilborn

Secretary-Treasurer

Hilborn, Werner, Carter & Associates

1627 S. Myrtle Avenue

Clearwater, Florida 33516

Mr. Stanley H. Jones

Timber Products Inspection

Big Elk Meadows

Lyons, Colorado 80540

Mr, James L. Judge

Executive Vice President

National Association of Building

Manufacturers

1619 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

Mr. A. M. Kageler

Building Owners and Managers Assn.

224 S. Michigan Avenue

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Mr. Jess Mcllvain

Architectural Director

Tile Council of America, Inc.

1707 N Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036

Mr. Bill B. Moody

SAFIREDOR

P.O. Box 41

Tacoma, Washington 98412

Mr. Chuck Morton

Assistant Director, Standards Division

Mobile Home Manufacturers' Association

P.O. Box 201

Chantilly, Virginia 22021

Mr. Ronald G. Nickson

Chief, Building Codes and Standards

Brick Institute of America

1750 Old Meadow Road

McLean, Virginia 22101

Mr. Robert E. O'Bannon

Director of Er'ucation

International Conference of Building

Officials

5360 S. Workman Mill Road

Whittier, California 90601

Mr. Stanley Olenn

Engineer, Technical Services

Glass Division

PPG Industries, Inc.

1 Gateway Center

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222

Mr. Ralph W. Klinker

President

Statistical Surveys, Inc.

3773 28th Street, S.E.

Grand Rapids, Michigan 49508

Mr. Jack J. Krause

Chief Architect

Bechtel Assoc. Professional Corp.

3621 S. State Road

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106

Mr. Kenneth D. Rhoton

Gold Seal, Division of E.T.L.

2201 Hawthorne Drive

Elkhart, Indiana 46514

Mr. J. P. Robinson

Timber Products Inspection and Testing

Service

P.O. Box 456

Lithonia, Georgia 30058

66
Mr. James R. Saffer

Nutone Division Scovill

Madison & Red Bank Road, 3 Cincinnati, Ohio kblll

Mr. Edward J. Shereda

Vice President, Showcase Corporation

18656 Fitzpatrick Avenue

Detroit, Michigan 48228

Mr. James C. Spence

Manager, Engineering and Research Services

American Iron and Steel Institute

150 East Forty-Second Street

New York, New York 10017

Mr. Ed Starostovic

Executive Vice President

Product Fabrication Systems

303 Price Place

Madison, Wisconsin 53705

Mr. Dave Steele

Housing Engineers, Inc.

2841 Hurstview Drive

Hurst, Texas 76053

Mr. Joseph Stein, P.E.

Vice President

Tishman Research Corporation

666 Fifth Avenue

New York, New York 10019

Mr. Cliff Stevens

Manager, Building Codes & Product

Acceptance

Champion International, U.S. Plywood Div.

777 Third Avenue

New York, New York 10017

Mr. Gunars Zvaners

Product Planning Research Manager

Andersen Corporation

Bayport, Minnesota 55003

ASSOCIATE MEMBERS

Mr. J. D. Allstott

City of West University

3800 University Boulevard

Houston, Texas 77005

Mr. George P. Anikis

General Engineer

Consumer Product Safety Commission

5401 Westbard Avenue

Bethesda, Maryland 20207

Mr. Jim Brennan

Director, Environmental Management and

Engineering Division

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development

451 7th Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20410

Mr. Benjamin Buchbinder

Hazard Analysis

Fire Technology Division

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

Mr. George T. Goforth

General Engineer

Architectural and Engineering Development

Division, Research and Engineering

Defense Civil Preparedness Agency

Pentagon

Washington, D.C. 20231

Mr. W. G. Vasvary

Executive Director

Southern Building Code Congress

3617 8th Avenue, South

Birmingham, Alabama 35222

Mr. James G. Gross

Chief, Office of Housing Technology

Center for Building Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

Mr. George Weinhagen

Building Officials and Code Administrators

International, Inc.

414 N. Larch

Lansing, Michigan 48926

Mr. Steve Wilson

Research Engineer, Research and Development

Department

National Homes

P.O. Box 680

Lafayette, Indiana 47902

Mr. L. W. Hennings , P.E.

Director, Department of Inspections and

Operations

City of Corpus Christi

302 S. Shoreline Drive, Box 9277

Corpus Christi, Texas 78408

Mr. Ernst W. Kiesling

Texas Tech University

Lubbock, Texas

67
Mr. Art Newberg

Office of Policy Development and Research

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Dev.

451 7th Street, S.W., Room 4106

Washington, D.C. 20410

Dr. Edward 0. Pfrang

Chief, Division of Structures, Materials

and Life Safety

Center for Building Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

Mr. Brian C. Pierman

Structural Engineer

Consumer Product Safety Commission

5401 Westbard Avenue, Room 906

Bethesda, Maryland 20207

Mr. Tom Seymour

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

U.S. Department of Labor

400 1st Street, N.W, , Room 504

Washington, D.C. 20210

Mr. Wayne Schiffelbein

Consumer Product Safety Commission

1750 K Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20207

Mr. James P. Talentino

Mechanical Engineer

Consumer Product Safety Commission

5401 Westbard Avenue

Bethesda, Maryland 20207.

Mr. Harry E. Thompson

Acting Director, Center for Building

Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

Mr. W. D. Turner

Texas A&I University

P.O. Box 2160, Station //I Kingsville, Texas 78363

Dr. James R. Wright

Deputy Director

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

Mr. Ronald P. Younger

Consumer Product Safety Commission

5401 Westbard Avenue, Room 520

Bethesda, Maryland 20207

NBS STAFF ASSISTANCE

Mr. Gene A. Rowland — Conference

Executive Secretary

Acting Deputy Director

Center for Building Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

Mrs. Sandra A. Berry

Mr. Patrick W. Cooke

Mr. Robert D. Dikkers

Mr. Robert M. Eisenhard

Mrs. Maria S. Holloway

Mr. C. T. Mahaffey

Mrs. Kathy Pearce

Dr. Francis T. Ventre

Mr. Bertram M. Vogel

ADDRESS STAFF AT:

Office of Building Standards and Codes

Services

Center for Building Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D, C. 20234

SPEAKERS

Mr, Ben F. MacDonald

Executive Director

Texas Department of Community Affairs

Austin, Texas

Dr. Lawrence Kushner

Commissioner

Consumer Product Safety Commission

1750 K Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20207

Mr. Jack E. Tumilty, P.E.

Chairman

ASHRAE, Executive Committee on Energy

Conservation

Collins Engineering Associates, Inc.

735 Mayo Building

Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103

68
REPORT OF THE

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

OF THE

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATES ON BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS

Conference Year 1973-74

This has been a fruitful year: NCSBCS has accomplished several important tasks.

The Council of State Governments has accepted and published three model acts developed

by joint State and Federal action.

'It has seen a crash program instituted by NBS in response to the request by NCSBCS for

energy criteria.

This criteria was given to the Conference and turned over to the American Society of

Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) , for developing an energy standard for implementation by the States.

ASHRAE is currently deeply involved in that work at this time.

Our Reciprocity Committee has collected recommendations from the State for the improvement of the ANSI A119.1 Standard. This material has been forwarded to NBS for review

and recommendations.

The Standards and Evaluation Committee developed procedures for increased State input

to the A119.1 document.

The Standards and Fvaluation Committee has also been very active in participating in

many nationally known agencies, such as the Model Codes Standardization Council (MCSC)

;

American National Standards Institute's Construction Technical Advisory Board (CTAB)

;

the Council of American Building Officials (CABO) • American Society for Testing and

Materials' Committees E32 and E36 ; American National Standards Institute's Committee

A40. The American National Metric Council is a new and important area in which this

Committee is involved

.

The Education and Qualification Committee, through its Chairm.an , has seen fit to give

the rights of the Swenson 100 Point Evaluation Plan for Building Officials to the NCSBCS,

This Committee has participated in National Academy of Code Adm.inistration (NACA) and

various other educational functions.

Management and Regulatory Procedures Com.ittee The Fire Reporting System of NFPA has

been distributed to all state fire marshals and their respective governors who have been

urged to adopt same.

This Committee has done extensive work in attem.pting to formulate uniform permit forms

with the cooperation of the Bureau of Census.

Reciprocity Committee — Through the dedicated leadership of Herb Meyer, the Reciprocity

Committee was instrumental in developing a new cooperative procedure for proposing

amendments to A119. While I do not as a matter of policy single out individuals, I must give credit to Herb for his dedication to NCSBCS.

69
STANDARDS AND EVALUATION COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP LIST

1973-1974

Chairman: Kenneth C. Henke, Jr.

Building Code Commissioner

Office for Planning & Programming

523 East 12th

Des Moines, Iowa 50319

Delegate/State Members

Norton Remmer

Department of Community Affairs

141 Milk Street

Boston, Massachusetts 02109

C. Sutton Mullen, Jr.

State Fire Marshal

P. 0. Box 1157

Richmond, Virginia 23209

James Hicks, Jr.

Chief, Division of Research & Assistance

Department of Housing & CommunityDevelopment

455 Capitol Mall, Suite 385

Sacramento, California 95814

Richard Furlong

Texas State Building Materials and

Systems Laboratory Council

Civil Engineering Department

University of Texas

Austin, Texas 78712

Associate Members

Thomas Seymour

OSHA, U. S. Department of Labor

400 First Street, N. W., Room 504

Washington, D. C. 21210

Joseph Bartell

Director, Building Inspection Department

650 - 16th Street, North

St. Petersburg, Florida 33705

Eugene Pester

Superintendent, Department of Building and

Safety

Pomona City Hall, P. 0. Box 660

Pomona, California 91769

Affiliate Members

Ed Starostovic

Executive Vice President

Product Fabrication Services

P. 0. Box 5038

Madison, Wisconsin 53705

James Spence

Manager, Engineering & Research Servic

American Iron and Steel Institute

1000 16th Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20036

Thomas Flint

Director, Technical Services Division

American Plywood Association

1119 A Street

Tacoma, Washington 98401

Joseph Stein

s Vice President

Tishman Research Corporation

120 South Riverside Plaza

Chicago, Illinois 60606

Ex-officio Members

Jasper Hawkins

^ Chairman, AIA Codes & Standards Committee

Hawkins and Lindsey Architects

301 Silverlake Boulevard

Los Angeles, California 90026

NBS Staff Assistance: Charles T. Mahaffey;

Steve Wilson

Research Engineer

Research and Development Department

National Homes Corporation

P. 0. Box 680

Lafayette, Indiana 47902

Bertram Vogel

70
REPORT

of the

STANDARDS AND EVALUATION COfMTTTEE

to the

7th ANNUAL MEETING

of the

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATES ON BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS

Austin, Texas

April 28 - May 3, 1974

TABLE OF CONTENTS

P age

STANDARDS AND EVALUATION COMMITTEE ~ GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 72

THE PAST YEAR 73

ASTM E-36 73

ASTM E--32 73

ANSI A119.1 73

MCSC - MODEL CODE STANDARDIZATION COUNCIL 75

CTAB - CONSTRUCTION TECHNICAL ADVISORY BOARD 75

TALL BUILDING CONFERENCE 75

CABO - COUNCIL OF AMERICAN BUILDING OFFICIALS 76

ANSI - A40 NATIONAL PLUMBING CODE 77

INTERIM ENERGY STANDARDS 77

Al^IMC - AMERICAN NATIONAL METRIC COUNCIL 77

NFPA - NATIONA-L FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION 77

ACCREDITATION OF TESTING LABORATORIES ^

OSHA

GUEST SPEAKERS

LOOKING AHEAD • . . .

71
STANDARDS AND EVALUATION C0MI1TTTEE

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The goals and objectives selected by the Standards and Evaluation (S&E) CoF.inittee to

further the role of the National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards

(NCSBCS) are:

A. Promote the activities of the Model Code Standardization Council (MCSC) in the establishment of a national consensus standard development project (including timetable goals)

to produce:

1. standard definitions used in building codes;

2. standard building code occupancy classifications;

3. standard types of construction;

4. standard format for building code use.

B. Develop support as may be needed for the continued study of the HUD-FHA performance

standards document as a National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards/

Council of American Building Officials draft that could be used for the development of

a national consensus standard useful as a supplement to building codes for the evaluation of innovative housing system.s.

C. Promote the development of national consensus standards for regulatory reference in

conserving energy used in new buildings .

D. Promote the speedy completion of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)

E-32 and E-36 standards making sure that this standards ' activity accurately reflects

the needs of the States

E. Investigate the feasibility of establishing a consensus standard development project

related to the material emanating from the NBS Coordinated Evaluation System (CES)

research project.

F. Encourage the adoption of recognized model building codes and consensus standards,

discouraging the development and/or use of standards that duplicate existing m.odel

building codes and consensus standards

G. Support the development and promotion of recommendations that will resolve the overlap

of fire codes and/or building security requirements, with those of building codes.

H. Continue NCSBCS participation in the A119 standards activity and the American National

Standards Institute (ANSI) Construction Technical Advisory Board (CTAB) , including the

development and timely introduction of agenda items for each that are of special

interest to the States.

I. Identify other building standards activities of special significance to the States

and recommend an appropriate NCSBCS relationship to each.

J. Promote the completion of the study of model building codes, identifying; those subject

areas for which there are no consensus reference standards; those subject areas where

the model codes differ from existing consensus standards; priorities among regulatory

standards needs.

K. To review the role of building regulations relative to disaster mitigation (earthquakes,

extreme winds anf similar dynamic hazards)

72
THE PAST YEAR

The first meeting of the year was held in Des Moines, Iowa. In pursuing a policy adopted

in prior years, membership on various national committees was continued; and as new ones were identified, they too were added. The committees and NCSBCS representatives are as follows

ASTM E-32, E-36*

ANSI A119.1*

MCSC'^

CTAB (ANSI)

Tall Building Conference

CABO

ANSI A40*

Energy Standard

ANMC (Metric Conversion)

Richard Furlong

Kenneth C . Henke , Jr

Ed Starostovic

Joseph Stein

Richard Furlong

Gene Pester

Joseph Stein/Kenneth C. Henke, Jr,

Kenneth C. Henke, Jr.

*Denotes Instructed Delegate

Guidelines for "Instructed Delegates" developed by Mr. Mahaffey of NBS were approved by the

S&E Committee and adopted by the Executive Committee.

AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS (ASTM) E-36

No report at this time.

AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS (ASTM) E-32

C. Sutton Mullen has served as the S&E delegate for the past two years. He also is the

Chairman of the E-32 Committee, and as such has at times been placed in a difficult

position. To alleviate this problem, Richard Furlong has been appointed to represent

NCSBCS and to permit Sutton to devote full time to the chairmanship.

The work of the Committee has about drawn to an end. The document of E-32 (Criteria for

Evaluating Agencies Concerned With System Analysis, Testing and/or Compliance Assurance of

Manufactured Buildings) is in its final review before submitting it to ballot. There is

still the possibility of referral back to the Committee. It is felt that the standard will

be available in the not-too-distant future.

As this standard was requested by NCSBCS and that much time, effort and money has been

expended, many people will be observing what we (NCSBCS) will do with it.

The E-32 Committee is currently reviewing the document Coordinated Evaluation System (CES)

Project to determine whether it has any immediate or long-range effect on its work.

AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE (ANSI) A119.1

During the past year the instructed delegate has worked with the A119.1 Mobile Home Standard

Committee. He has in addition to the Committee assignment been appointed to the Correlating

Committee.

The A119 Committee is structured as follows:

73
A119

Correlating'

Committee

A119.1

Mobile

Home

Standard

Construction

Task Force

A119.2

Recreational

Vehicles

Standard

A119.3

Mobile Home

Parks

Standard

Heating

Task Force

Plumbing

Task Force

A119.4

Recreational

Vehicle Park

Standard

Electric

Task Force

Amendments are submitted at the task force level where they are reviewed and approved or rejected. At this level, the most technical expertise is gathered. The next review is by

a full sectional committee. They attempt to eliminate any duplication or overlap. If any

does exist or objection to any amendment is voiced, that section may be returned to the

task force to be resolved. The next step is to submit to letter ballot of all members

of the full Committee. Any negative comments must be resolved or an attempt made to resolve

them before further action can be taken.

The next action is the review by the Correlating Committee to determine if conflicts or duplication exist between the various standards, before 9ubTnission to the National Fire

Protection Association (NFPA) for its approval. After obtaining NFPA's approval it is then

submitted to ANSI for its review and approval.

The last step in the procedure is the assigning of the ANSI number and date.

This whole process is time consum.ing. Virtually, 12 to 15 months may be consumed before

the standard is ready for adoption by the States.

In the past, NCSBCS has not truly been involved in the entire process. We have reacted to

instead of generating action. In discussing this problem with the NCSBCS Reciprocity

Committee and the National Bureau of Standards, the following system has been developed,

presented to the Reciprocity Committee, and the Executive Committee and received their

approval

.

In order that a timely sequence of events can be developed, members of the Reciprocity

Committee will submit their recommendations for change to the A119.1 Mobile Home Standard

by April 1. These will be consolidated, reviewed by the Reciprocity Committee at the

NCSBCS Annual Conference, and a NCSBCS position will be developed. The approved amendments

then will be submitted to NFPA to be consolidated with all other amendments from across

the country. The total amendment package will be reviewed by the Reciprocity Committee and

a NCSBCS position will be developed on each one.

At the first task force meeting the instructed delegate and his alternate will present

NCSBCS's position.

All amendments approved at the task force meeting will be reviewed at the next Reciprocity

Committee meeting. Again, a NCSBCS position will be developed. The instructed delegate at

the full A119.1 meeting will defend NCSBCS's position and attempt to secure reassignment of

those amendments not meeting its approval back to the task force for further study.

Prior to the next meeting of the Reciprocity Committee a letter ballot will be submitted to

all members of the Reciprocity Committee. A simple m.ajority of those returning their

ballots will constitute the vote to be cast by NCSBCS.

74
The last position -from which we can attempt a defense is the Correlating Committee There,

we must identify a territorial conflict before we can request action.

To assist the "Instructed Delegate" a special committee of the Reciprocity Committee has

been appointed. It is composed of the Chairman and the four Regional Vice-Chairmen . This

will enable him to obtain an opinion on subjects that require immediate action.

MCSC - MODEL CODE STANDARDIZATION COUNCIL

At its ir.eeting in Jacksonville, Florida, it was , announced that the MCSC recommendations were

to be incorporated within, the following time frame: Building Officials and Code Administrators (BOCA) - 1975; International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) - 1976; Southern

Building Code Congress (SBCC) - 1977. ' Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

has been invited to become a member of the group. ICBO is experiencing a problem with the

incorporation of the recommendations in that it must have its own compilation of standards

referenced in ICBO codes

.

MCSC is developing a list of standards for referencing in building codes that are basic to

code enforcement. They are eliminating secondary and tertiary standards that are not

frequently used, and those that are basically recommended practices.

BOCA has taken the position that all standards and recommended practices referenced in its

code must be included.

CTAB - CONSTRUCTION TECHNICAL ADVISORY BOARD

Several standards have been submitted to CTAB for review of representation by organizations.

All but one meet the criteria. As a result, affirmative votes were cast by the NCSBCS

delegates. The one that received our abstention was the A40 National Plumbing Code. At the

time, two factors were the overriding consideration. First, the model code groups were not

represented. Second, it appeared that only a specification standard would again be

developed . On receiving a report that the model code groups had been invited and had

declined the offer and that, at a minimum, both a performance standard and a specification

standard would be developed, the abstention was withdrawn and an affirmative vote was cast.

TALL BUILDING CONFERENCE

The; Joint Committee on Tall Buildings is an international exchange of information activity,

sponsored by engineering, architectural, and planning professionals to study and report on all aspects of the planning and design of tall buildings. The Joint Committee is also concerned with stimulating the use of recent findings from research laboratories and from

design practice. The Committee sponsors local, regional, and international conferences,

and publishes reports and proceedings from these conferences

.

The Joint Committee on Tall Buildings was formed in 1969 as a combined effort of the

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the International Association for Bridge and

Structural Engineering (lABSE) . From the beginning, the American Institute of Architects

(AIA) and the American Institute of Planners (AIP) were directly involved, and strong

liaison ties have been maintained with other organizations —CIB, CEB , ECCS , FTP, HUD, NAE,

NBS, Gosstroy, as well as the Chicago Committee on High Rise Buildings. In 1973, as a result of the increased emphasis on planning and environmental criteria, AIA, AIP, International Federation for Housing and Planning (IFHP) , and International Union of Architects

(lUA) were invited to join the forming organizations as equal participants. Financial

support has been obtained primarily from the National Science Foundation and the American

Iron and Steel Institute. Liaison membership now includes more than one hundred organizations, including local groups in the major cities, international groups, state officials,

professional societies, and representatives of owner, developer, financial, and user interests. Liaison membership serves most usefully in helping to eliminate duplication of

effort, as well as improving a m.ore complete exchange of information.

75
The major efforts of the Joint Committee have been the preparation of the MONOGRAPH,

exchange of technical information, and implementation and improvement on methodology in

planning and environmental aspects associated with tall buildings. Subject areas of the

MONOGRAPH include the philosophy, architecture, social, political, transportation, planning,

and other aspects of environmental impact, service systems, structural systems, loading

systems, structural safety, security, foundations, and all appropriate design methods,

including limit states applied to both steel and concrete high rise buildings. Present plans

include the possible development of a computer based information data center. National and

regional conferences have been held at the rate of about four a year since 1971. The international regional conferences have served the valuable purpose of bringing to the attention

of professionals and local regions the problems and proposed solutions associated with tall

building construction and operation. Following is a list of the task force committees now operating for the Joint Committee:

1

.

Environmental System.s 21

.

Elastic Analysis

2

.

Service Systems 22 . Nonlinear Analysis and Limit Design

3. Structural Systems 23

.

Stability

4. Construction 24 . Stiffness and Crack Control

5. Gravity Loads and Temperature Effects 25 . Creep, Shrinkage, and Temperature

6

.

Earthquake Loading and Response Effects

7. Wind Loading and Wind Effects 26. Limit State Design

8. Fire and Blast 27 . Masonry Structures

9. Quality Control Criteria 28. Philosophy of Tall Buildings

10. Structural Safety and Probabilistic 29 . History of Tall Buildings

Methods 30. Architecture

11

.

Foundation Design 31. Urban Planning

12. Architectural -Structural Interaction 32. External Transportation

13. Commentary on Structural Standards 33 . Parking

(Steel) 34. Economics

14. Elastic Analysis and Design 35. Applications of System

15. Plastic Analysis and Design 36 . Motion Perception and Tolerance

16. Stability 37 . Social Effects of the Environment

17. Design Methods Based on Stiffness 38. Socio-political Influences

18. Fatigue and Fracture 39. Interference Effects

19. Load Factor (Limit States) Design 40. Energy Conservation

20. Commentary on Structural Standards

(Concrete)

As a NCSBCS contact member of the Joint Committee for liaison purposes , it is my understanding that there is vary little direct input opportunity for NCSBCS to the

Joint Committee at this moment. However, witnin the near future there should be abundant

opportunity for information accumulated by the Joint Committee to be of use as background

material for decisions and directions of NCSBCS.

CABO - COUNCIL OF AMERICAN BUILDING OFFICIALS

CABO would support the restructuring of the National Academy of Code Administration (NACA)

in order that better participation would be achieved between CABO and NCSBCS. Action has

been taken by CABO to work with NFPA to eliminate the differences between the model codes

and NFPA documents. At the June meeting the proposal by MCSC was adopted whereby a list

of standard titles applicable to codes in the building, plumbing, and mechanical fields

would be developed, subject to approval by MCSC. A National Research Board is to be

established. It will cover all buildings except manufactured buildings. The model code

groups will no longer participate in A119 activities as they consider it to be a dual

standard

.

CABO would welcome a more formal relationship with NCSBCS.

76
ANSI - A40 NATIONAL PLUMBING CODE

An attempt has been made to reactivate the National Plumbing Code. It was evident for a time that only another specification code was under consideration. This we strongly

objected to. At the January meeting. Mr. Mahaffey, representing NBS , and Mr. Henke , acting

as the alternate to Mr. Stein representing NCSBCS, appeared before the A40 Comm.ittee and

presented the position of both NBS and NCSBCS. The most acceptable document would be a performance code, one that assists the States in their regulatory functions , but if both a performance code and a specification code were developed, we would work with them. If only

a specification code was developed, we would have no alternative but to withdraw, and could

not permit our organization's nam.e to be associated with it.

Action at this time by the AAO Committee would indicate that they are responsive to a performance document. The next meeting of the Committee is scheduled for mid -May in

Chicago

.

INTERIM ENERGY STANDARDS

In June, after several States had expressed interest in energy conservation in buildings,

a Joint NCSBCS/NBS Emergency Workshop on Energy Conservation in Buildings was held in

Washington, D. C. The result of the workshop was a request from the S&E Committee to the

Executive Committee that a request be sent to NBS to develop an energy conservation program.

The document should contain:

1. the design of a building energy conservation consensus performance standard

development project for State regulatory reference;

2. the development of a draft performance standard for State regulatory reference;

3. the distribution to NCSBCS delegates and to the Governor's Energy Aides of the

basic energy conservation reference volumes referred to repeatedly by NBS staff

during the "technical options' portion of the Joint Workshop;

4. the dissemination to the broadest media of audio and video materials for the

education of the public on voluntary actions to conserve energy use in buildings.

A committee composed of representatives from the National Bureau of Standards (NBS)

,

National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards (NCSBCS) , American Institute

of Architects (AIA) , American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, Air-conditioning Engineers

(ASHRAE) , and Consulting Engineers Council (CEC) was assembled. On February 26 of this

year, a document titled ' Design and Evaluation Criteria For Energy Conservation in New

Buildings" was presented to the Executive Committee of NCSBCS. In turn, it was transmitted

to ASHRAE to transform it into an Interim Energy Standard by May 1. At that time it can be adopted by the States for implementation.

ANMC - AMERICAN NATIONAL METRIC COUNCIL

The conversion from the English System of Weights and Measures to the Metric System is

gathering steam. In order that the States' building officials and associated industry are not caught unaware, the S&E Committee has requested that the Executive Committee request

representation on the American National Metric Council. Action is now pending.

NFPA - NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION

NFPA is in the process of developing a National Fire Prevention Code. The code cuts across building code groups to coordinate their efforts in the development of a National Fire

Prevention Code have been effective.

77
A motion approved by the S&E Committee stated that:

"The S&E Committee recommends to the Executive Committee of NCSBCS that a special

meeting be called of all the model code groups, NFPA, and others interested in fire

codes. The purpose would be to devise a mechanism for gaining the cooperation of

all in the production of a single fire prevention code that could settle the

interminable fight between fire marshals and building code officials.

ACCREDITATION OF TESTING LABORATORIES

OSHA - OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION

The September 11, 1973, Federal Register contained the Department of Labor proposed Rules

and Regulations for the Accreditation of Testing Laboratories. VJhile most of these parallel

the positions taken by NCSBCS, there were certain areas which differed substantially. The

S&E Committee recommends to the Executive Committee that the Chairman of NCSBCS write OSHA

urging as a substitute for OSHA's September 11, 1973, Proposed Laboratory Accreditation

Rules and Regulations, that OSHA's proposed laboratory accreditation procedures be

coordinated with efforts currently underway through NBS, aimed at developing a quasi-public

National Accreditation Board made up of public, government, corporate, professional and consumer representatives, as a means to achieve a coordinated national system that can equally serve all public (government) and private needs.

GUEST SPEAKERS

Guest speakers who appeared before this committee were:

Dick Stevens, National Fire Protection Association (NFPA); his subject was NFPA Standards

Format. Mel Green, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) ; ASME's Boiler and

Pressure Vessel Code Development Procedures. A.nd Ron Melott, National Fire Protection

Association (NFPA); who explained NFPA's National Fire Protection Code and the objectives

of the committee.

LOOKING AHEAD

It is recommended that NCSBCS continue its representation at the various committees It now

serves on.

Areas of concern requiring action:

1. Establish an accreditation board using the E-32 Standard.

2. Review the actions of the model code groups to determine if suitable progress

toward uniformity has been made and determine the direction they are moving.

3. Fire codes, building codes coordination.

4. Review building security requirements.

5. Stimulate the reconciliation of differences in fire safety in existing codes

and standards.

6. Continue to monitor the energy standard development.

7. Identify the needs for new standards and the organizations to develop them.

78
EDUCATION AND QUALIFICATION COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP LIST

1973-1974

Chairman: Glen R. Swenson

Director, State Building Board

Room 124, State Capitol

Salt Lake City, Utah 84114

Delegate/State Members

John Wenning, Administrator

Industrial Safety and Buildings

Department of Industry, Labor and Human

Relations

201 East Washington Avenue

Madison, Wisconsin 53702

Charles Ta Image

Director, Division of Housing

Department of Community Affairs

P. 0. Box 13166, Capitol Station

Austin, Texas 78711

Charles Dinezio

Executive Secretary

State Building Code Commission

141 Milk Street

Boston, Massachusetts 02109

David McNeill

Chief Administrator

General Construction Board

P.O. Box 5155

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501

Associate Members

James J. Brennan

Acting Director, Program Requirements

Division - OCES

Department of Housing & Urban Development

Washington, D. C. 20410

William Vasvary

Executive Director

Southern Building Code Congress

3617 8th Avenue South

Birmingham, Alabama 35222

Robert E. O'Bannon

Director of Education

International Conference of Building

Officials

5360 South Workman Mill Road

Whittier, California 90601

Ottmar H. Becker

Commissioner of Public Works and

Buildings

3700 W. 175th Place

Country Club Hills, Illinois 60577

Affiliate Members

Professor Lyman L. Francis

University of Missouri

201 Mining Building

Rolla, Missouri 6540L .

A. C. Breckenridge , Jr.

President, Breck Construction Company, Inc.

P. 0. Box 102

Monroe, Louisiana 72101

James R. Dowling

Director, Codes & Regulations Center

American Institute of Architects

1735 New York Avenue, N. W,

Washington, D. C. 20006

NBS Staff Assistance: Robert D. Dikkers

Dana L. Hannan

Meek and Hannan

5440 East 38th Street, North Drive

Indianapolis, Indiana 46218

79
REPORT

OF THE

EDUCATION AND QUALIFICATION COMMITTEE

TO THE

7TH ANNUAL MEETING

OF THE

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATES ON BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS

Austin, Texas

April 28 - May 3, 1974

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

EDUCATION AND QUALIFICATION OF ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL ~

1973-1974 PROGRAM OUTLINE 81

MEETINGS 82

PREFACE 82

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF CODE ADMINISTRATION . ^2

SYSTEM FOR EVALUATION OF QUALIFICATIONS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS 83

MODEL LEGISLATION 83

ATTACHMENT ~ BY-LAWS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF CODF ADMINISTRATION 84

80
1973-1974 PROGRAM OUTLINE

EDUCATION AND QUALIFICATION OF ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL

Develop minimum criteria for qualifying various types and grades of code enforcement

officers and support the implementation of programs utilizing the criteria.

Participate in the finalization of model legislation and model rules and regulations

for the registration of code enforcement officers. Direct the committee's energies

toward obtaining approval of this model legislation by the NCSBCS, the Council of Stat

Governments and the States

.

Develop model educational programs for code enforcement officers and support the

implem.entation of such programs

.

Maintain an up-dated compilation of education and training programs, and instructional

materials for code enforcement officers, and prepare a compendium of curricula for cod

enforcement officers being offered at various educational and training institutions.

Develop model procedures to permit interstate reciprocity for the registration of code

enforcement officers, including the possibility of the establishment of a "national

council of State code enforcement officers registration boards.''

Cooperate with other appropriate interested organizations in carrying out the above

tasks

.

81
MEETINGS

During the 1973-197A Conference Year, the NCSBCS Education and Qualification (E&Q) Committee

met in Colorado Springs, Colorado, on July 18; Des Moines, Iowa, on September 18; Boston,

Massachusetts, on December 6; and Salt Lake City, Utah, on February 26, 1974. The minutes

of these meetings have been prepared and distributed. Copies are available from the

Secretariat on request.

PREFACE

During the previous year (1972-73) the Education and Qualification (E&Q) Committee had

concluded that the enormity of the logistics of some of the tasks set for the Committee

made it necessary to investigate the possibility of cooperating with some other organization

to collect data and assemble the necessary information to implement the objectives of the

NCSBCS through its E&Q Committee. A number of approaches were explored.

A significant step was taken when the E&Q Committee in conjunction with the National

Academ.y of Code Administration (NACA) , sponsored a National Symposium on Education and

Training of Code Enforcement Officers. This Symposium was held in Austin, Texas, in

December of 1972. Immediately following the Symposium, the E&O Committee concluded that

the governing structure of the National Academy of Code Administration was not sufficiently

broadly representative as to justify NCSBCS endorsement because of lack of affiliation of

the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) and Southern Building Code

Congress (SBCC) . The Executive Committee of NCSBCS was so advised and concurred in the

position

.

At the NCSBCS Annual Conference in Hartford, Connecticut in May of 1973, a representative

of the NACA advised the NCSBCS that the NACA was willing to restructure itself to provide

the broad representation suggested by the NCSBCS Education and Qualification Committee.

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF CODE ADMINISTRATION

The major activity of the E&Q Committee during the past year has been in conjunction with

the restructuring of the National Academy of Code Administration (NACA) to provide broad

representation of governace.

Based on meetings and discussions with representatives of NACA and the Council of American

Building Officials (CABO) , the E&Q Committee developed the following position which was approved by the NCSBCS Executive Committee on September 19, 1973:

"That NCSBCS participate in the National Academy of Code Administration through

participation in the policy board of the Academy, provided that the redrafting

of the Academy's bylaws take into account the following points:

(a) that the Academy is restructured to create an executive committee

in which policy making responsibility shall be vested;

(b) that the Executive Committee shall consist of 13 members, 2 each

to be appointed by the National Conference of States on Building

Codes and Standards, Building Officials and Code Administrators,

International Conference of Building Officials, and Southern

Building Code Congress; and 5 to be elected by an advisory

Board of Trustees;.

82
(c) that the 5 members elected by the Board of Trustees shall be

broadly representative of the following fields and disciplines:

architecture, engineering, public management, education and

construction

;

and provided further that other provisions of the bylaws are found acceptable to

NCSBCS upon receipt of a final draft of said bylaws."

At a NACA meeting held on January 11, 1974, the bylaws of NACA were revised to accomplish

the restructuring desired by NCSBCS. (See Attachment No. 1 —NACA Bylaws.) Mr. Glen Swenson,

Utah, and Mr. Charles Dinezio, Massachusetts, have been selected to serve as NCSBCS representatives on NACA's Executive Committee for the 1974 calendar year.

At the present time, CABO has hired James S. Baker, Management Consultant, Potomac, Maryland,

to develop detailed program plans and recommendations for future NACA projects and activities.

This contract study is scheduled to be completed in mid-1974 and presented to the NACA

Executive Committee for final consideration and implementation.

It Is hoped that continued cooperative efforts with NACA will provide sufficient data to the

States to aid them in establishing and maintaining effective programs of education and

training for code enforcement officials.

SYSTEM FOR EVALUATION OF QUALIFICATIONS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS

The E&Q Committee has discussed and considered a systematic method of evaluating the

qualifications of code enforcement officers.

A basic approach has been outlined which, if adopted by the various States, would provide

comparability on a broad basis. Another feature would be that of flexibility in that the

system would accept future developments as supplements without significant modification.

The basis of the system would be an evaluation scale ranging from 0 to ICQ.

The problem faced by the Committee is that of providing the detailed and intensive study

required to Implement the basis concept . Explorations are presently being made as to

the methods and means of assembling the expertise necessary to convert the concept into a useful and m.eaningful tool for use of the States and other interested organizations.

MODEL LEGISLATION

The "Model Registration of Code Enforcement Officers Act" was completed in January, 1973 by

the Department of Commerce Special Working Group. Subsequently, this model legislation was presented in mid-1973 to the Council of State Governments (CSG) along with the other model

acts (Manufactured Building, Mobile Homes and State Building Code). Primarily due to a lack of background information and precedents for such legislation , the CSG did not accept

this model act for inclusion in its 1974 Suggested Legislation package.

The E&Q Committee recommends that the Special Working Group be reactivated and the model

act be reviewed for possible modification and resubmission to the CSG in 1975. It is also

recommended that this review be conducted so as to include more input from building

officials. Postponement of this continuing work on the model act until late 1974 will alp

permit the E&Q Committee to review and coordinate the model registration act with respeC

to objectives and programs of NACA which should be available in mid-1974.

83
BY-LAWS

OF THE

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF CODE ADMINISTRATION

Approved Jaruary 11, 1974

(Incorporated

Sept. 25, 1970)

ARTICLE 1: PROVISIONS OF INCORPORATION AND REGISTRY

1. The name of the corporation is: National Academy of Code Administration.

2. The period of duration of the corporation is: Perpetual.

3. The address of its initial Registered Office in the State of Illinois is; 1313 E. 60th

Street, in the City of Chicago (60637), County of Cook, and the name of its initial

Registered Agent at said Address is: Richard L. Sanderson.

4. The first Board of Directors shall be five (5) In number, their nam.es and addresses

being as follows: Richard L. Sanderson, 1313 E. 60th Street, Chicago, Illinois;

Buell B. Dutton, 1025 Lake Street, Evanston, Illinois; Walter H. Lewis, Department of

Architecture, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois; Bernard T. Aschenbrand

,

Municipal Building, Bergenfield, New Jersey; and John A. Wlshart , 924 Mill Street,

Wethersf ield , Connecticut.

5. The purpose or purposes for which the corporation is organized are: To conduct research

in the principals and practices of regulatory code administration; to publish the results

of studies in code administration; to develop curricula, establish standards for

accreditation and certification, sponsor educational activities and engage in all other

scholarly activities necessary to the development and establishment of the art of

regulatory code administration as a unique and distinct profession within the broad

field of public administration; and to do all things necessary, suitable, and proper

for the accomplishment of the purposes or objects or the furtherance of the powers

herein set forth not inconsistent with the laws of the State of Illinois.

6. The corporation is organized not for pecuniary profit. If the corporation is dissolved,

any assets remaining after all liabilities have been discharged will, pursuant to the

Illinois General Not for Profit Corporation Act, be transferred to one or more entities

organized and operated exclusively for scientific or educational purposes.

7. No part of the net earnings of the corporation shall inure to the benefit of or be

distributable to its members, trustees, officers or other private persons except that

the corporation shall be authorized and empowered to pay reasonable compensation for

services rendered.

8. No substantial part of the activities of the corporation shall be the carrying on of

propaganda or otherwise attempting to influence legislation and the corporation shall

not participate in or intervene in (including the publishing or distribution of statements), any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office.

9. Notwithstanding any other provisions of these articles, the corporation shall not carry

on any other activities not permitted to be carried on (a) by a corporation exempt from

Federal Income tax under Section 501(c) of the IRC of 1954 (or any future amendments)

or (b) by a corporation, contributions to which are deductible under Sec. 179(c) of the

IRC of 1954 (or any future amendments)

.

10. Upon the dissolution of the corporation, the Executive Committee shall, after paying or making provisions for the payment of all the liabilities of the corporation dispose of

all of the assets of the corporation exclusively for the purposes of the corporation in

such manner, or to such organization(s) organized and operated exclusively for

84
charitable, educational, religious or scientific purposes as shall at the time_qualify

as an exempt organization(s) under Sec. 501(c)(3) of the IRC of 1954 (or any future

amendments) as the Executive Committee shall determine. Any of such assets not so disposed of shall be disposed by the Circuit Court of the county in which the principal

office of the corporation is then located, exclusively for such purposes or such

organi2ation(s) as said court shall determine, which are organized and operated

exclusively for such purposes

.

ARTICLE II: GOVERNING BODY

1. Executive Committee . The affairs of the corporation shall be controlled by an Executive Committee.

2. Members of the Executive Committee . Shall be appointed or elected in the following manner at the annual meeting or at any special meeting called for this purpose:

Two (2) members designated by Building Officials & Code Administrators International.

Two (2) members designated by International Conference of Building Officials.

Two (2) members designated by National Conference of States on Building Codes and

Standards

.

Two (2) members designated by Southern Building Code Congress.

Five (5) members elected by the Board of Trustees.

3. Chairman of the Executive Committee . Th6 members of the Executive Committee shall elect

one (1) of their number to act as chairman and one (1) to act as vice-chairman.

4. Board of Trustees . There shall be a Board of Trustees which will serve as an advisory

council to the Executive Committee and to elect five (5) members to the Executive

Committee.

5. Members of the Board of Trustees . Shall be elected at the annual meeting or at any

special meeting of voting members called for this purpose.

6. Chairman of the Board of Trustees . The members of the Board of Trustees shall elect

one (1) of their number to act as chairman and one (1) to act as vice-chairman.

7. Number of Trustees . The Board of Trustees shall be comprised of not more than thirtytwo (32) persons.

8. Terms of Office . Members of the Executive Committee and Trustees shall serve from the

date of their election or appointment until the next annual meeting, or until their successors are elected or appointed and qualified.

ARTICLE III: MEMBERSHIP

1. Voting Membership . A majority of the voting members of the corporation at any voting

members' meeting may elect voting members of the corporation in addition to those who

are voting members on the date of the adoption of these by-laws. Any voting member

may withdraw by delivering a written resignation to the chairman or secretary, or may

be dropped from voting membership by a two-third (2/3) vote of the voting members

present at any meeting of voting members. No voting member , Executive Committee

member, or Trustee of the corporation shall as such derive any pecuniary gain from the

operation thereof but this shall not be construed to prevent the payment or expenses

incurred in attending meetings.

85
2. Membership . The Executive Committee may establish non-voting membership classifications,

establish annual dues for such members, specify their qualifications and determine the means and degree of their participation and benefits.

3. Annual Meetings . Regular annual meetings of the Executive Committee and Board of

Trustees shall be held immediately after the adjournment of the annual meeting of the

voting members at which Trustees are elected and at the place of such annual meeting. of

voting members.

4. Joint Meetings . At least one (1) joint meeting of the Executive Committee and the

Board of Trustees shall be held annually at the place of, and in conjunction with, the

annual meeting of the voting members. The Chairman of the Executive Committee shall

preside

.

5. Special Meetings . Special meetings of the Executive Committee and/or Board of Trustees

may be called by their respective chairmen or by a majority of their members.

6. Notice of Meetings . No notice of the annual meeting of the Executive Committee or Board of Trustees shall be required, but notice in writing of each special meeting shall

be given by the secretary or the chairman to each member of the Executive Committee or Trustee, not less than five (5) nor more than forty (40) days prior to the date of the

meeting by delivering the notice personally or by mailing it to him at the address as

it appears on the records of the corporation.

7 . Quorum .

a. Seven (7) members of the Executive Committee shall constitute a quorum..

b. One-third (1/3) of its members shall constitute a quorum of the Board of Trustees.

8. Committees and Appointment s. The Executive Committee and the Board of Trustees may

create special committees of two (2) or more of their members to perform such duties

as they may prescribe and to exist at their pleasure, but not beyond the next annual

meeting

.

9. Rules . The Executive Comm.ittee and the Board of Trustees may adopt rules and regulations not inconsistent with these by-laws for the conduct of meetings and the management of the affairs of the corporation as they may deem proper.

ARTICLE IV: OFFICERS

1. Officers . The officers of the corporation shall include a chairman, vice-chairman,

secretary and treasurer. All officers shall be elected by the Executive Committee at

their meeting and shall serve until the next annual meeting or until their successors

are elected and qualified. Any officers may be removed at any time by a majority

vote of the Executive Com.mittee.

2. Chairman . The chairman, who is a member of the Executive Committee, shall preside at

all meetings of the voting members, and of the Executive Committee and may represent

or designate a representative of the corporation on occasions of ceremony. With

approval of the Executive Committee shall: (1) appoint all committees thereof; and

(2) execute on behalf of the corporation deeds, contracts, and other formal instruments.

He shall sustain an advisory relation to the work and policies of the corporation and

shall perform such other duties as may from time to time be assigned to him by the

Executive Committee. When the chairm.ah cannot attend, the vice-chairman shall act in

his stead with the same authority.

3. Executive Director . The Executive Comm.ittee may appoint an Executive Director and fix

his compensation. The Executive Director shall manage the affairs of the corporation

within the policies fixed by the Executive Committee and shall perform such other

duties as may be assigned to him. He shall serve at the pleasure of the Executive

Committee

86
4. Secretary . The secretary shall attend all meetings of the voting members and of the

Executive Committee and Board of Trustees and of committees of the boards, and shall

record the minutes of such meetings . The secretary shall have custody of the seal of

the corporation and attest deeds, contracts, and other formal instruments and shall

perform other duties incident to the office as required by the Executive Committee.

5. Treasurer . The treasurer shall be the chief financial agent of the corporation. He

shall have the custody of all funds and securities of the corporation. He shall be

responsible for the receipt and disbursement of all monies of the corporation and shall

keep proper books of account of such receipts and disbursements, and shall prepare

financial statements in such form and at such times as may be required by the Executive

Committee

.

6. Ouher Officers . The Executive Committee may elect an assistant secretary and an assistant treasurer to serve in the absence or incapacity of the secretary and treasurer,

respectively. Such assistants shall have the duties and powers of their respective

principals during such absence or incapacity.

ARTICLE V: ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

1. Role of Executive Committee . The Executive Committee shall control the management and

business affairs of the corporation. It shall appoint post-auditors, designate depositories, and perform such other functions as may be prescribed by law.

2. Role of Board of Trustees . The Board of Trustees shall serve as an advisory council

to the Executive Committee and elect five (5) members to the Executive Committee.

ARTICLE VI: FINANCING, DUES AND FEES

1. Annual dues for the various types of membership shall be established by the Executive

Committee

.

2. Dues are payable at the beginning of each calendar year and become delinquent if not

paid by the end of the month of January. Failure to pay the required dues will result

in cancellation of membership. Reinstatement will require payment of a full year's

membership without being prorated.

3. Funds may be solicited from any source to assist in the financing of the operation of

the corporation and for the development of Its program.s . Expenditure of such funds

other than to operate the organization shall be determ.ined by the Executive Committee.

A. No part of the net income of this corporation shall inure to the benefit of any

individual, firm, or corporation except as provided in Article I, Section 7.

ARTICLE VII: MEETINGS

1. Annual Meeting . The annual meeting for the transaction of business as may properly come before the meeting shall be held in January of each year, or at such other time as may

be designated by the chairman or by resolution of the Executive Committee and specified

in the notice of the meeting. In case in any year the regular annual meeting shall not

be held as herein specified, or in case there should be no election at the annual

meeting or an adjournment thereof, a special meeting shall be called for that purpose

by the secretary as soon thereafter as may be feasible.

2. Special Meetings . A special meeting of the voting members may be called by the chair- man or by resolution of the Executive Committee and shall be called by the chairman

on the written request of any ten (10) voting members.

87
3. Place of Meeting . The place of any regular or special meeting may be at any location

approved by the Executive Committee.

A. Notice of Meetings . Notice of each regular and special meeting of the voting members

shall be given by or at the direction of the executive director or the secretary or the

chairman to each voting member in writing not less than five (5) nor more than forty

(40) days before the meeting by delivering such notice to them personally or by mailing

it to their several addresses as entered upon the records of the corporation. The notic

of any special meeting shall specify the subjects to be considered at the meeting, and

the business of the special meeting shall be confined to the subjects specified in the

notice thereof.

5. Quorum . Not less than ten (10) voting members shall be pjresent In person to constitute

a quorum at any meeting of the voting members.

6. Voting . At all meetings of the voting member, each member shall be entitled to one (1)

vote. A member may vote either in person or by proxy executed in writing by the voting

member. A proxy shall be filed with the secretary and shall be exhibited at the meeting

No proxy shall be valid after eleven (11) months from the date of its execution unless

otherwise provided in the proxy.

ARTICLE VIII: POWER TO CONTRACT

1. Power to Contact . No officer or agent of the corporation shall have power to m.ake any

contract or incur any liability on behalf of the corporation, or to represent or bind

the corporation in any transaction, unless authorized by these by-laws or by a resolution of the Executive Committee, provided, however, that this section shall not bar

the executive director from delegating his authority to other staff m.embers as necessary

to manage the affairs of the corporation effectively.

ARTICLE IX: AMENDMENTS

1. Amendments . These by-laws may be amended by a majority vote of both the Executive

Committee and a majority vote of the Board of Trustees present at any regular or special

meeting, provided that the notice of a special meeting shall state that proposed

alterations or amendments will be considered at such meeting.

88
MANAGEMENT AND REGULATORY PROCEDURES COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP LIST

1973-1974

Chairman: Charles J. Betts

State Building Commissioner

300 Graphic Arts Building

215 North Senate Avenue

Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Delegate/state Members

Harry Baker, Administrator

Building Codes Division

Department of Commerce

674 Church Street, N.E.

Salem, Oregon 97310

Jane Heron

Program Development Coordinator

Department of Local Government Affairs

160 N. La Salle Street, Room 300

Chicago, Illinois 60601

Delmont C. Thurber

Chairman, Montana Building Codes Advisory

Council

3815 5th Avenue South

Great Falls, Montana 59401

Milton Duke

Assistant Commissioner

Division of Housing and Community Renewal

Two World Trade Center

New York, New York 10047

Associate Members

Thomas Tiedeman

American Institute of Architects Research

Corporation

1735 New York Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20036

Forrest Nelson

Building Inspections Administrator

City of Beaumont

P. 0. Box 3827

Beaumont, Texas 77704

Affiliate Members

Daniel M. McGee

Chief Resident Engineer

American Iron and Steel Institute

25 E. Salem Street

Hackensack, New York 07601

Ed Estes

Executive Director

American Institute of Constructors

1140 N. W. 63rd Street

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73116

Edward J. Shereda

Vice President, Showcase Corporation

18656 Fitzpatrick Avenue

Detroit, Michigan 48228

Advisory Members

Herbert W. Meyer Charles F. Tarr

State Building Inspector Department of Community Affairs

408 Metro Square Building 363 West State Street

7th and Robert Streets Trenton, New Jersey 08690

St. Paul, Minnesota 55101

NBS Staff Assistance: Patrick W. Cooke

89
REPORT

of the

MANAGEMENT AND REGULATORY PROCEDURES

COMMITTEE

to the

7th Annual Meeting

of the

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATES ON

BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS

Austin, Texas

April 28 - May 3, 1974

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

COMMITTEE MEETINGS 91

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 91

COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES 92

1. Uniform Building Permit Application Form 92

2. Fire Data and Reporting 92

3. State Building Code and Regulatory Programs 92

4. Model Informational Documentation 92

5. Computer-Based Systems for Building Codes and Their Administration ... 92

90
COmiTTEE MEETINGS

During the 1973-74 Conference Year the Management and Regulatory Procedures CoTnmittee met on three occasions: in Des Moines, Iowa, on September 17 and 18, 1973; in Boston, Massachusetts,

on December 6, 1973; and in Salt Lake City, Utah, on February 26, 1974. Copies of the

Minutes of these meetings have been published, distributed to Delegates, and are available

from the Secretariat.

GUEST SPEAKERS

Mr. David I. Siskind of the U.S. Bureau of Census gave a presentation on the Uniform Building Permit Application Form and Mr. Ralph Klinker, Statistical Surveys Incorporated, spoke

on numerical coding systems for mobile homes and recreational vehicles at the Boston

meeting. Mr. Ben Buchbinder, Fire Technology Division, National Bureau of Standards, spoke

at both the Boston and Salt Lake City meetings on implementation of the National Fire Data

System. Mr. Ron Melott explained NFPA's Uniform Fire Incident Reporting System at the Salt

Lake City Meeting.

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The goals and objectives of the Management and Regulatory Procedures Committee as contained

in the 1973-74 NCSBCS Program Outline are as follows:

A. Recommend and support the development and establishment of management and regulatory

procedures, and documents which will provide the States with appropriate models for

efficient code administration and enforcement.

B. Gather and report appropriate statistical and background information and data on the

administration and technical operations of code enforcement programs.

C. Provide sample organization models and staffing patterns for use by the States for

State, county and municipal code enforcement bodies.

D. Provide suggested model procedures and documents (forms, checklists, reports) pertaining

to the evaluation, approval and inspection of buildings, building components and

products

.

1. Encourage the adopting of building permit applications containing the uniform core information derived by the U.S. Bureau of Census.

E. Provide suggested remuneration and fee schedules, general budgetary information, and

fiscal procedures.

F. Support the development and adoption of uniform information collection and storage

systems (manual, m.icroform and computers) in order to achieve administrative effectiveness and efficiency, and to promote nationwide exchange of statistical information

relating to building regulation and failures (fire, structural, electrical, mechanical).

1. Promote the adoption of a uniform fire incident reporting system utilizing the

coding system set forth in NFPA Standard 901 and containing uniform core information developed by the NBS in the National Fire Data System project.

G. Encourage the development and m.aintenance of a technical library —codes and standards,

product approvals, system approvals, fire ratings; and a library of pertinent legal

opinion, case history and law on code enforcement.

1. Recommend suggested outlines and procedures for prosecution of code violators.

91
COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES

1 . Uniform Building Permit Application Form

The concept of promoting adoption of a reasonably uniform building permit application form

on a national basis received considerable attention. The standard permit application form

selected was tha model form containing uniform core information desired by the U.S. Bureau

of Census. This position is in accordance with Resolution No. 6 approved at the 6th Annual

Conference

.

In order to test the interest and responsiveness of local officials and the effectiveness of

the State building official as a vehicle for implementation of the form, letters were sent

on March 7, 197A^ to all permit issuing municipalities in Indiana explaining the background

and advantages of adopting a standard building permit application form throughout Indiana.

Attachment No. 1 is a copy of the letter mailed to all permit issuing jurisdictions.

Responses to the letter are starting to come in. It is planned to analyze these responses

and make the results knoxv-n to the Bureau of Census.

2 . Fire Data and Reporting

In further support of Resolution No. 7 of the 6th Annual Conference, a letter was sent on October 25, 1973^ to Governors, State Delegates and State Fire Marshals transmitting a list

of standard data elements for fire incident reporting as part of the National Fire Data

System and a copy of NFPA Standard 901, "Uniform Coding for Fire Prevention - 1973.'' See

copy of sample letter as Attachment No. 2 to this report. Seventeen States responded with

letters endorsing the system.

A pilot implementation of a national fire incident system is currently underway under the

direction of the Fire Technology Division of the National Bureau of Standards. Three State

reporting systems and several county and municipal systems will feed data into the pilot

program. The data consist of fire incident reports from individual fire departments.

Several different fire reporting systems are used by the participants in this program,

however; they all have the common thread of definitions based on NFPA Standard 901.

Output from the pilot program will be widely disseminated to the user community and feedback will be solicited so that the pilot program may evolve into a national system of

broad scope.

The committee also suggested that NCSBCS formally seek membership on NFPA Committee 901, as well as membership positions for local building officials or model code organizations so that States and local building officials can participate in developing and refining the

reporting system.

3 . State Building Code and Regulatory Program.s

The committee, through a letter dated October 19 , 1973, from the Conference Chalrm.an

,

requested NBS to continue research studies, including the State code profiles, on State

building code and regulatory programs. Sum.mary tables depicting the status of manufactured

building and mobile home programs have been prepared and distributed by the Office of

Building Standards and Codes Services, CBT, NBS.

4 . Project CES - Model Inf orm.ational Documentation

The committee reviewed the major activities and preliminary CES report, NBSIR 73-278,

"Model Documents for the Evaluation, Approval and Inspection of Manufactured Buildings,"

September 1973, and made recommendations to the NCSBCS Executive Committee that the report

proceed to f inalization based on the review comments received

.

5 . Computer-Based Systems for Building Codes and Their Administration

The committee reviewed progress on the AIA Research Corporation project entitled 'A Master

Plan for Computer-Based Systems for Building Codes and Th.eir Administration."

92
1974-75 OBJECTIVES

1. Through the cooperation with fire prevention officials and their organizations support

the effort to relate fire data to building regulation; through improved fire reporting,

uniform definitions, and analysis and distribution of results.

2. Promote uniform, systematic administrative procedures in building regulatory agencies

through the use of such documents as the Uniform Building Permit Application Form as developed by the U. S. Bureau of Census and the CES Model Documents.

.3. To further dissemination and utilization of the vast body of information in the area of

construction, the Committee will identify sources of such information and explore

computer-based methods of making these data available and useful to state and local

building regulatory officials.

4. Through Committee members and other representatives to NCSBCS, identify critical areas

in the administration of building regulatory programs in which poor information flow

of inadequate procedures are hampering the effectiveness of state and local building

regulation.

5. Encourage study and better definition of staffing patterns and organizational settings

for various sizes and types of jurisdiction at state, sub-state or local government

levels

.

93
ADDENDUM TO MANAGEMENT AND REGULATORY PROCEDURES ANNUAL REPORT

MODEL BUILDING ENERGY CODE ACT

Mr. Betts presented the Model Building Energy Code Act prepared in response to requests made

by various States. Substantial concern was raised regarding the impact of distribution

of such a document and its publication by the Council of State Governments. Several

potential problems were identified: —that NCSBCS endorsement or distribution might encourage enactment of discrete

energy-conservation legislation where no State building code exists. —that laws patterned after this model might be enacted, creating competing building

regulatory agencies where a State code is in operation. —that at the -local level, the State level, or between. State and local, a builder

might have to obtain two separate and possibly conflicting plan reviews.

Mr. Duke pointed out that the existing Model State Building Code Act included energy

conservation as an objective and function of State building codes, and that this comprehensive approach has been the approach adopted by NCSBCS.

Ms. Heron moved that the Committee recommend to the Executive Committee that before any

distribution of this document, a cover letter or revised introduction to the act be prepared

to address itself to potential problems, identified by the M&RP Committee, that might result

from separate enactment, and that such letter emphasize four points:

A. the importance of incorporating energy conservation in building into a State

building code

B. the importance of placing the total responsibility for building regulation,

including energy, in one agency

C. the problems generated by creating two building regulatory agencies at the

State or local level

D. the problems generated by creating a state energy-related building regulatory

agency in addition to and possibly in conflict with the existing local building

department

.

The motion was seconded and passed.

It was the sense of the Committee that NCSBCS should go on record as recommending a simple

amendment to the building act to include energy conservation or adoption of a comprehensive

state building code including energy conservation rather than separate legislation.

94
ST'^TE OF INDIANA

ATTACHMENT #1 -

TO ALL BUILDING OFFICIALS AND OTHER OFFICIALS ISSUING BUILDING PERMITS

RE: UNIFORM BUILDING PERMIT

At the request of the National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards, this

office is undertaking a program in our State which, if successful, will serve as the model

to all other States in bringing uniformity to building permit application forms.

Currently, there are approximately 300 building permit issuing jurisdictions in our State

and almost as many different buildi'ng permit application forms requesting a variety of

information. Some of these forms are of relatively recent design; others have remained

unchanged for many years and the information is no longer useful as when originally

composed; still others were patched as a new need arose instead of being reevaluated and

redesigned. Even within metropolitan areas where the independent jurisdictions have the same building problems, and the permit officials discuss mutual problems, the application

forms frequently bear little resemblance to one another.

Relative to building codes and standards which are highly technical, complicated and

ponderous works, the building permit application form is a simple document. However,

whereas uniform building codes and standards have been adopted areawide and statewide, the

institution or the concept of an areawide uniform permit application form has not attracted

the attention it should, considering its importance.

Properly used and containing uniform basic data items, the permit application can provide

a clear picture of all construction occurring in a particular jurisdiction, within a metropolitian planning area, or larger region, and within the State. More important, use

of an areawide standard form would facilitate collection and publication of data by a central agency and eliminate the need for the general public to upset your records—to go

into your files when a central agency has all the information for all jurisdictions in the

area.

The concept and the idea of a standard application form has the support of the Building

Officials and Code Administrators, International, Inc., the National Association of Home

Builders and their local affiliates (whose members would prefer filling out one form to

the many different ones they now do) , and regional planning commissions which are hampered in their functions by inadequate information on nev7 construction in their area. There is little opposition to the idea, but not much has been done to implement it.

About eight years ago, following a review of many application forms, the U.S. Bureau of

Census circulated a recommended permit application form to all known permit issuing

jurisdictions. It contained those items which the Bureau considered basic to all applications. The form, or a modified version, is in use in the Columbus and Cincinnati, Ohio

areas; in the Baltimore, Maryland, and Washington, D. C. areas; by the State of New Jersey

and in most jurisdictions in Rhode Island; and other places.

About a year ago, the National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards con- sidered a request by the Bureau of the Census to recommend adoption of the concept of a standard form by its members. The conference agreed and decided to go beyond recommendation to implementation. The conference believes the proposal is sound and should be

instituted as soon as feasible.

Indiana was selected as the test State.

Attached is the "third" generation proposed Census form and a statement regarding its

contents and use. The entire statement is important, but let me repeat two sentences

which are vital:

"The form is a viable document which should and must be modified to meet local

requirements and changing data needs" and

95
"The form and its contents should be considered as a core which can be accepted

as is, which can be rearranged or which can be implemented as necessary."

In effect, if the form cannot be used as is, it can be implemented and redesigned to

include the information required by the permit office.

This letter is the first step in our effort to have a "standard" application form adopted

throughout the State. We know that one identical form will not be acceptable to all

jurisdictions throughout the State. By "standard", we imply adoption of the "base" items

in Sections II and III and a format which would make tabulation relatively simple. However,

a single form would be ideal.

We would appreciate your comments on this undertaking and any recommendations you may have

on procedures and techniques of implementing adoption of a "standard" form in your

community or area. We are also sending copies of this letter to regional planning

commissicnc which may be interested in acting as coordinators of this program. If the

proposed form is inadequate for your purposes but with some modification can be adapted

to your needs, and you require help in redesigning your present form, please let us know.

Charles J. Betts, FAIA

State Building Commissioner

96
ATTACHMENT #2

SAMPLE LETTER 10-25-74 Mailing

Honorable George Wallace

Governor of Alabama

State Capitol

Montgomery, Alabama 36104

Subject: Endorsement of National Fire Data System

Dear Governor Wallace:

The National Commission of Fire Prevention and Control, in its final report to the

President, recommended m,easures to reduce the fire hazard facing the nation. These measures

include the creation of a national fire data system to provide data for the definition of

problem areas and the support of a comprehensive program to reduce the loss of life and

property from fire.

One of the major data sources for the national system will be reports of fire incidents

from local fire departments, compiled at the state level. It is important that the

reporting be based on a uniform set of term.s and definitions to facilitate national com.pilation and provide a useful feedback to state and local jurisdictions.

The National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards (NCSBCS), in which you are represented by Delegate John R. Farris offers and endorses for use in your state, a list of

data elements for fire incident reporting prepared by the Fire Technology Division, National

Bureau of Standards. This list is contained in Enclosure 1, a short paper entitled

''National Fire Data System: State and Local Fire Incident Data Reporting." The list is

based on a set of uniform terms and definitions developed by the National Fire Protection

Association (NFPA) , with the addition of two data elem.ents relating to structural fires.

Enclosure 2 is a copy of the NFPA terms and definitions, published as NFPA Standard 901,

"Uniform Coding for Fire Protection-1973 .

While it is not the intent of the Conference, or the National Bureau of Standards, to

specify the data collection system for individual states , we urge those states already

collecting fire incident data, and those planning to do so in the future, to promote

national data uniformity by using the standard terms and definitions and by including the

recomm.ended data elements in the data collected.

At the present tim.e a number of states are using the system outlined above, reporting to

the NFPA, and m.aking use of the information and reports.

Sincerely,

BERNARD E. CABELUS

National Chairman

Enclosures (2)

cc: State NCSBCS Delegate

State Fire Marshal

97
Reciprocity Committee Membership List

Officers

Herbert Meyer, Minnesota, Chairman

Vern Eder, Indiana, Midwest Regional Vice Chairman

Erik Thorne, Arizona, Western Regional Vice Chairman

John Steele, Texas, Southern Regional Vice Chairman

Vacant, Northeast Regional Vice Chairman

Vern Eder, Indiana, Secretary-Treasurer

Members

ALABAMA

Roy L. Thornell, State Fire Marshal

445 S. McDonough

Montgomery, AL 36104 (205) 269-7676

ARIZONA

Erik V. Thorne, Director

Division of Building Codes

1645 W. Jefferson

Phoenix, AZ 85007 (602) 271-4072

ARKANSAS

James H. Shelton, Director

Mobile Home Standards Program

Department of Health

4815 W. Markham

Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 661-2316

CALIFORNIA

Russell R. Bahr

Codes and Standards Administrator II

1500 Fifth Street - Room 200

Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 445-9471

COLORADO

J. L. Brock

Colorado Division of Housing

1575 Sherman Street

Denver, CO 80203 (303) 892-2748

CONNECTICUT

Bernard E . Cabelus

State Building Inspector

Department of Public Works

State Office Building

Hartford, CT 06115 (203) 566-4036

FLORIDA

J. D. Calvin, Director

Division of Motor Vehicles

107 W. Gaines

Tallahassee, FL 32304 (904) 488-7657

GEORGIA

J. L. Caldwell, Director

Safety Fire Commission

State Capitol

Atlanta, GA 30334 (404) 656-2065

IDAHO

C. Likes, Director

Mobile Home, Recreational Vehicle & Manufactured Housing Division

Statehouse Annex 4 Boise, ID 83707 (208) 384-3896

ILLINOIS

Robert Wheatley

Department of Public Health

535 W. Jefferson Street

Springfield, IL 62716 (217) 525-6782

INDIANA

Vernon L. Eder, Director

Manufactured Building Division

Administrative Building Council

215 North Senate Avenue

Indianapolis, IN 46202 (317) 633-5433

IOWA

Donald W. Appell, Deputy Building

Code Commissioner

Division of Municipal Affairs

523 E. 12th Street

Des Moines, lA 50319 (515) 281-5974

98
KANSAS MISSOURI

Charles Beardmore, P.E.

Division of Architectural Services

State Office Building

Topeka, KS 66612 (913) 296-3811

KENTUCKY

Paul Stivers

Assistant Director of Inspections

Department of Vehicle Regulations

State Office Building

Frankfort, KY 40601 (502) 564-3750

MAINE

J. D. Brownrigg, Manager

State Housing Authority

Inspection Division

P. 0. Box 1450

Portland, ME 04104 (207) 781-3350

MARYLAND

Willard Bryant, Director

Codes Administration

Department of Economic & Community

Development

2525 Riva Road

Annapolis, MD 21401 (301) 267-1123

MASSACHUSETTS

Charles J. Dinezio, Coordinator

Office of Code Development

100 Cambridge Street

Boston, MA 02202 (617) 727-6917

MICHIGAN

Robert C. Hilprecht, Executive Director

Construction Code Commission

414 N. Larch

Lansing, MI 48926 (517) 373-8187

MINNESOTA

Herbert W. Meyer, Director

Department of Administration

Building Code Division

408 Metro Square Building

Seventh and Robert Street

St. Paul, MN 55101 (612) 296-4626

MISSISSIPP I

Walter M. Hester, Director

Mobile Home Inspection Division

Office of the Fire Marshal

P. 0. Box 22542

Jackson, MS 39205 (601) 354-6304

Douglas R. Busby, Director

Division cf Mobile Homes & Recreational Vehicles

Public Service Commission

Jefferson City, MO 65101 (314) 751-3234

MONTANA

W. James Kembel, Supervisor

Building Codes & Standards Section

Capitol Station

Helena, MT 59601 (406) 449-3104

NEBRASKA

F. H. Jolly, Director

Department of Health

Environmental Sanitation Division

1003 "0" Street

Lincoln, NE 68508 (402) 471-2541

NEVADA

Dan J. Quinan

Nevada State Fire Marshal

813 North Plaza - Room No. 5 Carson City, NV 89701 (702) 882-7497

NEW HAMPSHIRE

W. W. Hoffman, Principal Planner

Office of Comprehensive Planning

State House Annex

Concord, NH 03301 (603) 271-1110

NEW JERSEY

Thomas Tang, Administrator

Mobile Home Administration

Division of Housing & Urban Renewal

Department of Community Affairs

P. 0. Box 2768

Trenton, NJ 08625 (609) 292-6684

NEW MEXICO

David McNeill

General Construction Board

Box 5155

Santa Fe, NM 87501 (505) 827-2085

NEW YORK

Louis Neilsen, Director

Division of Housing & Community Renewal

Two World Trade Center

New York, NY 10047 (212) 488-7080

99
NORTH CAROLINA TENNESSEE

Kern Church, Secretary

State Building Code Council

P. 0. Box 26387

Raleigh, NC 27611

NORTH DAKOTA

(919) 829-3901

Edward W. Kimsey

Director-State Fire Marshal

Department of Insurance

Division of Fire Prevention

202 Capitol Towers Building

Nashville, TN 37219 (615) 741-2981

Corliss F. Nelson

State Superintendent of Construction

State Capitol

Bismarck, ND 58501 (501) 224-2900

OHIO

Herbert Rosmarin

Board "of Building Standards

220 Parsons Avenue

Columbus, OH 43215 (614) 466-3316

OKLAHOMA

Allie Isom, Director

Engineering Department

Capitol Building

Oklahoma City, OK 73105 (405) 521-2111

OREGON

Harry Baker, Administrator

Building Codes Division

Department of Commerce

325 13th Street, N.E. - Room 601

Salem, OR 93710 (503) 378-3176

PENNSYLVANIA

C. Morgan Edwards, Chief

Division of Industry & Mobile Homes

Box 155

Harrisburg, PA 17120 (717) 787-9682

RHODE ISLAND

Frank Turano, Senior Code Specialist

Department of Community Affairs

150 Washington Street

Providence, RI 02903 (401) 277-2892

SOUTH CAROLINA

M. B. Robinson, Director

Division of Inspection Services

300 Gervais Street

Columbia, SC 29201 (803) 758-2941

SOUTH DAKOTA

T. Maher, Director

Division of Consumer Protection

Capitol Station

Pierre, SD 57501 (605) 224-3696

TEXAS

John P. Steele, Administrator

Department of Labor & Standards

Mobile Home Division

Box 12157 Capitol Station

Austin, TX 78711 (512) 475-2403

UTAH

S. R. Harman, Director

Mobile Home & Recreational

Vehicle Division

330 E. Fourth Street, South

Salt Lake City, UT 84111 (801). 328-5516

VERMONT

Pierre E. J. Donnet, Director

Development & Community

Affairs Agency

Montpelier, VT 05602 (802) 823-3231

VIRGINIA

C. Sutton Mullen, Jr. , Fire Marshal

State Corporation Commission

P. 0. Box 1157

Richmond, VA 23209 (804) 770-4751

WASHINGTON

John Hewitt

Department of Labor & Industry

Box 207

Olympia, WA 98504 (206) 753-6307

WEST VIRGINIA

John W. Landfried

Landfried Insurance Agency

412 N. Church Street

Ripley, WV 25271 (304) 372-9131

WISCONSIN

John Wenning, Administrator

Division of Industrial Safety & Building

201 E. Washington Avenue

Madison, WI 53702 (608) 266-1817

100
WYOMING DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Ed Bradley William N. Dripps, Chief

State Fire Marshal Bureau of Buildin-, Housing & Zoning

Fire Prevention and Electricity Safety 614 "H" Street, N.W.

Cheyenne, WY 82002 (307) 777-7288 Washington, DC 20C01

Other Participating State Officials

Note: Although NCSBCS records do not indicate that the individuals listed below have been

officially appointed to the Reciprocity Committee by the State Delegate, it is believed that

in a number of cases he is in responsible charge of some phase of the State's manufactured

building or mobile home certification program.

CALIFORNIA

James M. Hicks, Jr., Chief

Division of Research & Assistance

Department of Housing & Community

Development

455 Capitol Mall, Room 385

Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 445-9471

FLORIDA

Buck Jones

Mobile Home Construction Supervisor

Division of Motor Vehicles

Collin Building - 107 W. Gaines Street

Tallahassee, FL 32304 (904) 488-7657

ILLINOIS

Jerry D. Sternstein

Office of Housing & Buildings

Department of Local Government Affairs

303 E. Monroe

Springfield, IL 62706 (217) 525-3555

Jane Heron

Office of Housing & Buildings

Department of Local Government

309 W. Washington

Chicago, IL 60606

KENTUCKY

Allan Spader, Director

Office of Local Government

Department of Finance & Administration

Commonwealth of Kentucky

Frankfort, KY 40601 (502) 564-8540

Jim Klosterman, Administrative Officer

State Fire Marshal's Office

Department of Insurance

Capitol Plaza

Frankfort, KY 40601 (502) 564-3626

NEVADA

Richard H. Bast, Deputy

Nevada State Fire Marshal's Office

Mobile Home & Manufactured Building

Section

813 N. Plaza

Carson City, NV 89701 (702) 882-7497

OHIO

Hershall Davidson, Executive Secretary

Board of Building Standards

220 Parsons Avenue

Columbus, OH 43215 (614) 496-3316

VIRGIN ISLANDS

George Suarez

Department of Public Works

P. 0. Box N

Chrissinsted

St. Croix, VI 00802

WEST VIRGINIA

Joseph H. Mills, Acting Commissioner

Consumer Protection Division

Department of Labor

Capitol Complex

Charleston, WV 25305

101
REPORT OF THE

RECIPROCITY COMMITTEE

TO THE

7th ANNUAL CONFERENCE

OF THE

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATES ON BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS

Austin, Texas

April 28 - May 3, 1974

The Reciprocity Committee met on September 20, 1973, in Des Moines, Iowa; December 4 and 5,

1973, in Boston Massachusetts; and, February 28, 1974, in Salt Lake City, Utah.

The officers of the Committee are as follows:

Chairman: Herbert W. Meyer, Minnesota

Vice-Chairmen : Southern Region: John Steele, Texas

Northeastern Region: J. D, Brownrigg, Maine

Midwestern Region: Vernon Fder , Indiana

Western Region: Erik Thorne , Arizona

The Committee adopted a procedure for proposing amendments to the American National

Standards Institute (ANSI) A119.1. This procedure would utilize the technical staff of the

National Bureau of Standards to review proposed amendments and to allow members of the

Committee to approve or disapprove the proposed amendments. These recommendations will be

forwarded to the National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards (NCSBCS)

delegate to the ANSI A119.1 Committee for his use in presenting the recommendations through

his vote on the various amendments proposed by the Reciprocity Committee and other persons.

In addition, the Committee nominated additional members as alternates for the various task

force meetings. The members are as follows:

Edward Kiir.sey — Mechanical

John Steele — Heating

Harry Baker — Electrical

Rex Early — Structural (prior alternate)

The Comjnittee established a handbook which was prepared by Sutton Mullen. The handbook

incorporates the various procedures and programs of the Committee and will be used as a guide for the members and other interested parties. The handbook will be maintained by the

Comm.ittee as various programs and procedures are outlined and established.

The Committee has encouraged the continuance of the Reciprocity Committee program by and

between the various states and also between State agencies and private agencies. It is

hoped that the monitoring program can be established in the next year so that the entire

Reciprocity Committee can become credible and acceptable by not only the industry, but

also by the consumer.

The Committee also reviewed the Coordinated Evaluation System (CES) Document and encourages

the use of the documents by various agencies together with the Model Rules and Laws that were prepared in the past

.

102
HANDBOOK OF THE RECIPROCITY COMMITTEE

OF THE

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATES ON BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Foreword 104

History of the Reciprocity Committee 105

Directory (see Reciprocity Committee Membership List)

Authorization for Establishment of Reciprocity Committee 105

Rules for Committee Activities 107

Program Outline 107

Committee Policy on Achieving Interstate Reciprocity 110

State Manufactured Building Program Status Ill

State Mobile Home Program Status Ill

Specialized Reference Documents for Interstate Reciprocity Ill

Procedures for Developing a Consensus of the Reciprocity Committee for

Recommendations on: —Uniform Effective Dates —Uniform State Amendments —Disputed Interpretations

Procedures for Monitoring State Inspecting and Independent State Approved Inspections

Procedures for Promoting Acceptance by the National Mobile Home Standards Committee of

Reciprocity Committee Proposals for Revision in Cooperation with the Standards and

Evaluation Committee

Model Rules for the Listing of Organizations (Laboratories and Agencies) to Label

Industrialized Buildings

HPMA Design Guide HP-SG-71

Factory Follow-Up Test Program for Roof Trusses, November 10, 1972

Method of Test for the Evaluation of Exterior Mobile Home Walls for Horizontal Wind Load,

November 1, 1972

NBS Coordinated Evaluation System Project Preliminary Report

103
FOREWORD

The purpose of the Handbook is to provide an up-to-date and convenient compilation of the

agreements, procedures, policies, common references and other documents directly related to

the problem of uniform interstate acceptance of manufactured buildings and mobile homes.

Although developed for the members of the Committee, it is hoped that it will be useful to

the entire industry.

The Handbook of the Reciprocity Committee of the National Conference of States on Building

Codes and Standards was initiated by resolution of the Committee at its meeting in Boston,

Massachusetts, December 5, 1973. Committee Chairman Herbert Meyer of Minnesota appointed a subcommittee consisting of Sutton Mullen of Virginia and Jane Heron of Illinois to prepare

a first draft of the Handbook. The subcommittee draft was accepted for publication at the

Committee's meeting in Salt Lake City, February 28, 1974.

104
HISTORY OF THE RECIPROCITY COMMITTEE

One of the earliest concerns of the National Conference of States on Building Codes and

Standards was the establishment of criteria that could be used on an interstate basis for

the accreditation of laboratories and other organizations engaged in the evaluation and

certification of building products and systems. In its Annual Report for 1970, th6 Standards

and Evaluation Committee recommended that such a system be established and that the National

Bureau of Standards be requested to assist in its formation. The Laboratory Evaluation and

Accreditation Program (LEAP), the Coordinated Evaluation System (CES) , the national committee

(ASTM E-^32) on Criteria for Evaluating Agencies Concerned with System Analysis, Testing and/

or Compliance Assurance of Manufactured Building, and other important activites have since

developed from this Conference initiative.

In the meantime, a number of States had enacted Laws for the regulation of manufactured

buildings and mobile homes. They were confronted with an immediate problem of accrediting

evaluation, compliance assurance, and labeling agencies as a mechanism for the accept;ance of

out-of-state units. The problem also extended to accreditation of State inspection agencies

as a basis for reciprocal agreements among States. In many cases, however, the State

official assigned to implement the new law was not the same individual serving as the

Delegate to the Conference appointed by the Governor.

Therefore, early in 1971, the Conference Chairman established an Interim "Laboratory

Accreditation Board" whose membership would be open to the official in each State having

responsiblity for implementation of laws and regulations affecting the construction of

manufactured buildings and mobile homes. Mr, Kern Church of North Carolina was appointed as Acting Chairman. Participants at the initial meeting in Raleigh, North Carolina,

February 23-24, 1971, included:

Kern Church, NC

Austin Van Dusen, WA

C. Sutton Mullen, VA

L. P. Hamilton, SC

Louis Nielsen, NY

John Dunlap , CA

Bernard Cabelus , CT

Charles Hagberg, WI

Cecil Rose, OH

Joseph Anastasi, MD

Recognizing the value of such a committee, the Conference amended its Constitution at the

Annual Meeting in April 1971 to create a "Reciprocity Recognition Committee." Since then,

for the sake of brevity, the group has been known as the Reciprocity Committee. Mr. Herbert

Meyer of Minnesota was elected the first permanent Chairman in Des Moines, Iowa,

September 20, 1973, succeeding Mr. Church.

Subcommittees and Task Groups

Subcommittee to Study Standard Forms

Chairman: Williard Bryant, Maryland

Members: Steve Mazzoni, Underwriters' Laboratories

Vern Eder, Indiana

Subcommittee to Study the Problem of Minimum Sizes and Grades of Species of Structural

Lumber Used in Mobile Homes

Chairman

Members

Subcommittee to Study a Standard Numbering and Marking System for Mobile Homes

Chairman: Charles Beardmore, Kansas

Member: Donald Appell, Iowa

Subcommittee on Reciprocity Committee Handbook

Chairman: Sutton Mullen

Member: Jane Heron, Illinois

105
Advisory Committees

Independent Agency Advisory Group

(Membership open to any agency accredited by two or more States for some phase of evaluation,

testing, compliance assurance, and certification of manufactured building and/or mobile homes.

The committee has been created by the Reciprocity Committee for advice on problems that may

be referred to it from time to time. The group appoints its own officers.)

106
RULES FOR COWITTEE ACTI^^TIES

(Approved by NCSBCS Executive Coiimittee March 4, 1973)

Rule 1 Membership

A. Members shall be qualified and in conformance with provisions of Article I membership of NCSBCS by-laws, and more specifically as set forth in Article V

reciprocity committee, of NCSBCS by-laws.

Rule II Meetings

A. Regular m.eetings shall be held in coordination with and during the same week as the regular quarterly regional conference meetings, with notice given as established by conference.

B. Election of officers shall be held at the first meeting following the annual

conference and shall be the first item of business. Installation of officers

shall then be held prior to taking up of official business.

C. Special meetings (full com.mittee) may be called by the:

1. Reciprocity chairman, upon request of the conference chairman.

2. Reciprocity chairman, upon request of two regional reciprocity

vice- chairmen

D. Special meetings (regions) may be called by the:

1. Reciprocity chairman, with concurrence of the regional reciprocity vicechairman . 2. Regional reciprocity vice-chairman.

E. Reciprocity executive committee meetings may be called by the reciprocity

chairman, or by the reciprocity chairm.an upon request of a regional reciprocity

vice-chairman.

F. Notice of special meeting shall be by written notice mailed not less than thirty

days prior to a full committee meeting nor less than fifteen days prior to a regional m.eeting.

G. Meeting procedures. The order of business shall be established by the reciprocity chairm.an, and Roberts' Rules of Order, revised, shall govern the

proceedings of all meetings.

H. Voting.

1. At all meetings the state member or his duly authorized proxy, shall be

entitled to one vote for each office to be filled or other matters

subjected to vote.

2. State m.embers shall vote only on those questions to which they have been

designated or assigned, including manufactured buildings, mobile homes,

recreation vehicles, or a statewide building code.

3. All matters subject to determination by vote shall be resolved by a majority vote of authorized state members or proxies present and voting,

the total number of votes being not less than half of all members

eligible to vote on the matter.

4. Lacking a quorum, a letter ballot shall be sent by the secretarytreasurer to all authorized state m.embers. Ballots shall clearly state

the question and shall be voted either ''affirmative", "negative", or 107
"not voting", and shall be void if not returned to the secretarytreasurer within three days. Ballots marked "not voting" shall be

counted in establishing a quaruip which shall consist of not less than 50

percent of meinbers eligible to vote. Resolution shall be by a majority

of affirmative and negative notes.

Proxies. A proxy may serve for a state m.ember at any meeting, and shall

be so designated by the state member in writing to the reciprocity

committee chairman or secretary-treasurer.

Rule III Officers

A. Reciprocity Chairman. The comm.ittee chairman shall be elected members of the

reciprocity committee. He shall preside at all regular and special committee

meetings and shall coordinate all committee and regional reciprocity activities

with other conference activities and com.mittees. He shall be reponsible for

making reports to the conference.

Regional Reciprocity Vice-Chairm.an . Four R.R.V.C. shall be elected from and by

members within their respective regional areas. Regional areas shall be as set

forth in Article III of NCSBCS by-laws. They shall select one member to act in

the absence of the reciprocity chairman. They shall coordinate their work with

the reciprocity chairman, coordinate the vjork of their regional monitoring team

and conduct regional reciprocity Sub-committee m.eetings.

C. Executive com.mittee will consist of Reciprocity Chairm.an and Regional Reciprocity

Vice-chairman

.

D. Secretary-Treasurer. The secretary-treasurer shall be appointed by the

reciprocity committee chairman from, among the regional vice-chairmen. The

secretary-treasurer shall take and distribute all minutes of both regular and

special meetings, shall maintain the records including designated correspondence,

shall receive and account for all m.onies , shall pay all bills certified by the

reciprocity executive com.mittee.

E. Terms of all officers shall be for one Secretary-Treasurer upon resignation or by appointment of the reciprocity execu

term..

year. Regional ^'ice-Chairman and

incapacity to perform, m.ay be replaced

tive committee for the balance of the

Rule IV Relationship with Other Organizations

A. This com.m.ittee shall cooperate with other organizations as called for in Article

IV of NCSBCS by-laws.

B. Special consideration shall be given to strong cooperation with all nationally

recognized building officials organizations and their participation as non-voting

participants at all mieetings is encouraged. Cooperation and understanding of

local building officials and their organizations is necessary in order to be able

to reach our goals.

Rule V Relationship with the Executive Committee and Other Committees of NCSBCS

A. The reciprocity committee shall carry out the duties and responsibilities

established and set forth in the Constitution and By-I.aws of the National

Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards.

B. Copies of all correspondence by the Com.mittee shall be distributed as follows:

X-CC- Conference Chairm.an

X-CC- Secretariat

X-CC- Related Comjtiittee or Committees

X-CC- Reciprocity Committee Mem.bers

108
Rule VI Committees

A. The reciprocity committee chairman is empowered to establish AD-MOC committees

deemed necessary for the proper conduct of business.

B, Reciprocity Committee members of the four MCSBCS regions are assigned in their

respective regions and constitute regional reciprocity sub-committees'.

The reciprocity committee nay establish advisory committees in all code matters

to function on a general or regional basis, and report their activities to the

reciprocity comm.ittee chairman.

D. All personal expenses unless specifically funded by NCSBCS shall be the responsibility by the participating member.

Rule VII Amendm.ents

A. These rules m.ay be amended after formal introduction at any regular m.eetlng and

shall be voted upon as hereinbefore set forth in Article II-II and submitted to

Executive Com.m.ittee for approval.

109
COMMITTEE POLICY ON ACHIEVING INTERSTATE RECIPROCITY

(Adopted December 20, 1972)

Recommendations which Manufacturers and Associations should Support to Assist the Inter-State

Reciprocity Process .

(1) Make a clearly worded public policy statement (which will also be defended in private)

supporting effective enforcement of the national recognized model codes and standards in

the following manner

:

(a) Implementation by competent unbiased third party agencies which are commonly

approved and jointly monitored by the participating states or

(b) Implementation by competent state agencies which are jointly monitored by the

reciprocating states.

(c) Insist that the states technical criteria for acceptance of reciprocal inter-state

agreements and approval of independent third parties be the same including joint

state monitoring and that such criteria be uniform from state to state.

(2) Support processes for the education of the many sincere manufacturers on how to comply

and processes for persuading the few remaining manufacturers to make the decision to

comply instead of trying to find ways and means to get by without complying.

(3) Publicly and privately support and request the authority having jurisdiction to require

unbiased and competent evaluations and inspection which will require compliance before

labels are issued.

(4) Support efforts to provide for more uniform state laws which would encompass the main

provisions and intent of the "Model Manufactured Building Act" and to provide a system of

code enforcement to require all manufacturers to comply whether they wish to or not.

(5) Publicly and privately support the premise that all states adopt nationally recognized

codes and standards applicable to manufactured buildings and mobile homes and that such

codes be clearly worded and complete to the end that manufacturers which wish to use either the specification, design or test approach to comply will clearly understand what

is required and that state agencies and third party agencies can interpret uniformly and

implement fairly to all.

(6) Publicly and privately support the premise that all state and third party agencies which

perform evaluations and inspections must have a sufficient num.ber of engineers who are competent to evaluate the structural, plumbing, heating, and electrical systems in

accordance with the codes and standards and a sufficient number of inspectors who are competent to inspect the structural, plumbing, heating, and electrical systems in

accordance with compliance on all units produced.

(7) Publicly and privately insist that third party agencies which are approved as an agent

of the state to evaluate or inspect and label mobile homes and manufactured buildings to

preempt local inspection of "closed construction" systems be free of conflict of interest

so that no manufacturers will be favored over any other manufacturers. This would

include insisting that such third party agencies must not in any way be connected with

manufacturers or producers of products or materials where it could appear that any mobile

home or m.anuf actured building manufacturer might be favored.

(8) Publicly and privately insist that the evaluation and inspection by all third party

agencies approved by the state (including state approved reciprocating state agencies)

be monitored by each state (with joint state monitoring where possible) to the end that

all V7ill implement the requirements of the codes and standards uniformly and will require

all manufacturers to comply whether they wish to or not

.

110
(9) Provide support for each state to have a sufficient state staff of competent engineers

and inspectors to perform the work they are responsible for. If the state agency is

performing all the evaluations and inspections, continuing support must be given for the

large staff that would be needed to protect the public. If the state is to monitor third

party evaluations and inspections, support for the smaller staff should be given.

(10) Contact the state departm.ent heads and support the responsible state code administrators

in attending state code administrators meetings through the Reciprocity Comm.ittee of the

National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards and support their joining

joint inspection teams with other states to monitor commonly approved inspection agencies

in order to build their confidence in the evaluations and inspections not performed by

them.

An acceptable evaluations and inspections system must convince responsible, competent

state and local officials, the general public and sincere and knowledgeable manufacturers

that all manufacturers are required to comply with nationally recognized codes and

standards, whether they want to or not, if they are to display an acceptable identifying

label and enjoy the privilege of interstate reciprocity and acceptance among the states.

STATE MANUFACTURED BUILDING PROGRAMS STATUS

(Include Tables 3.0, 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 on this subject from the National Bureau of Standards)

STATE MOBILE HOME PROGRA^IS STATUS

(Include Tables 4.0, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 on this subject from the National Bureau of Standards)

SPECIALIZED REFERENCE DOCTOIENTS

FOR INTERSTATE RECIPROCITY

This section is not intended as a complete collection of standards, codes and other documents

that are referenced in the building regulatory process. Its purpose is to provide a ready

reference to certain agreements of the Reciprocity Committee and to other documents that have

a special usefulness in facilitating interstate acceptance of manufactured buildings and

mobile homes.

PROCEDURES FOR DEVELOPING A CONSENSUS OF THE RECIPROCITY COMMITTEE

FOR RECOMMENDATIONS ON UNIFORM EFFECTIVE DATES,

UNIFORM STATE AMENDMENTS AND DISPUTED INTERPRETATIONS

(Approved by NCSBCS Executive Committee March 4, 1973)

The following procedures are intended to give State code adm.inistrators an opportunity to

develop a consensus on these m.atters. This will provide a practical basis for voluntary

coordinated action by individual States. It is the intent of the procedures to allow

adequate time for study of proposals and to allow full opportunity for recommendations from

manufacturers and other affected parties. Another objective is to allow adequate time for

the required State procedures to be carried out and for the industry to make any required

conversion of production facilities.

The Reciprocity Comonittee believes that a national consensus of State adm.inistrators can and

should be developed so that the individual States will have the benefit of a national review

before taking unilateral State action.

Ill
DEVELOPING RECOMMENDATIONS ON UNIFORM EFFECTIVE DATES

The Reciprocity Committee will, in cooperation with the S & E Committee, prepare a list

of major national building standards and model codes to which these procedures are intended to apply. Such list shall include the cut off date for amendments to the next

edition of the Standard, public hearing dates and approximate publication date.

The Chairman of the Reciprocity Committee will maintain a list of current codes and

standards and projected publication dates (available to the public) for these standards

and codes listed in NCSBCS >!odel Acts and Model Rules and Regulations and for amendments

and revisions thereto. The list shall be furnished to each member of the Committee. As

changes occur, they shall be distributed prom.ptly to the members.

The Conference recomm.ends that each State act individually as follows:

A. When an organization that writes national building standards or model codes organizations publishes an amendment or revision to a model standard or code which is included

on the Reciprocity Committee list; and when such standard or code has previously been

adopted by the State; the State should institute procedures which will give producers

the option of complying with the amended or revised requirem.ents . The option should

begin no later than six months after the date of publication of the amendment or revision

as stated in the Reciprocity Com.mittee list.

B. Such option should expire and such amendment and revisions should be made mandatory

12 months after the date of publication by the code or standard makers group of the

amendments or revisions.

DEVELOPING RECOMMENDATIONS ON UNIFORM STATE AMENDMENTS

Where a State proposes to amend a national standard or model code because it is judged

to be incomplete, impractical, unclearly worded, overly restrictive or otherwise

inadequate, the State may request the Reciprocity Committee to establish an advisory

committee of state adm.inistrators and the other affected parties on the proposal. Such

recommendations shall be submitted to the Committee.

The Chairman of the Reciprocity Committee shall cause the proposal and any accompanying

explanatory material to the reproduced and distributed to the members of the committee.

The material shall also be made available to interested parties upon request. This

availability should be well publicized and written comments requested.

The Reciprocity Committee will consider the m.atter at its first scheduled meeting after

an adequate time for study has leen allowed (suggest 30 days m.inimum) . Oral comments

will be received from interested parties to the committee that time permits.

Where an affirmative consensus for amendment is developed, the Standards and Evaluation

Committee of NCSBCS should be requested to work for its adoption by the appropriate

national standard or model code-generating organization.

DEVELOPING RECOMMENDATIONS ON DISPUTED INTERPRETATIONS

In general. State or third party inspection agencies should preserve uniformity by

following nationally recognized precedent in interpreting and applying national standards

and m.odel codes. This can usually be achieved by requesting an official interpretation

from the standard generating organization.

Where the official interpretation is unacceptable or unavailable, the State or third

party may request the Reciprocity Comjnittee to establish an advisory consensus of State

administrators and the other affected parties on the disputed interpretation. The

Chairman of the Reciprocity Committee will cause the disputed interpretation and any

accompanying explanatory material to be reproduced and distributed to the mem^bers of the

comjnittee and invite written comments from all concerned. The material will also be

m.ade available to interested parties upon request. This availability should be well

publicized

.

112
3. The Reciprocity Committee will consider the matter at its first scheduled meeting after

an adequate time for study has been allowed (suggest 30 days minimum) . Oral comments

will be received at the meeting from affected parties to the extent that time permits.

On the basis of written and oral comments, the committee will establish a consensus as to how the interpretation should be dealt with. The consensus shall be submitted to the

S & E Committee.

4. The consensus should be promptly and widely publicized.

5. When the Reciprocity Committee has recommended an interpretation that is different from

the one received form the standard generating organization, that organization will be so advised. The Committee shall cooperate with the Standards and Evaluation Committee of

NCSBCS in working for any needed changes by the appropriate national standard or model

code-generating organization.

PROCEDURES FOR MONITORING STATE INSPECTING

MD INDEPENDENT STATE APPROVED INSPECTIONS

(Recommended to Executive Committee February 28, 1973)

REPORT OF THE AD-HOC COMMITTEE

To establish guidelines to implement the motion to establish regional joint teams to monitor

the operations of State or independent agencies - submitted 12-20-72 by James M. Hicks, Jr.,

Chairman, Herbert Rosmarin - Ohio and Will Bryant - Maryland, Members.

PURPOSE

To monitor each state certification program, for manufactured buildings, mobile homes and

recreational vehicles for informational purposes, to be distributed to all state delegates.

MEMBERSHIP OF TEAMS

Monitoring Teams to Consist of the Following Members:

1. One manufacturers association representative.

2. One independent third-party agency representative.

3. One state code administrator, one experienced in plan evaluation and review.

4. One code administrator experienced in in-plant and/or field inspection procedures.

5. One Federal governmental agency representative.

6. One representative of a local building official organization.

7. One general public representative.

OPERATION OF MONITORING TEAMS

Monitoring teams shall be established in each region by agreement within the region

coordinated by the regional reciprocity vice chairman. Team members shall not monitor their own jurisdictions. They shall serve lim.ited, staggered tests of no longer than one year and

not monitor over six other jurisdictions in their term, as a member.

Monitoring team.s shall monitor those jurisdictions within their regions and shall monitor one jurisdiction in another region (alternating regions) each year.

Monitoring teams shall gather such inform.ation as:

1. State requirements.

2. State implementation of requirements.

3. Plan evaluation procedures.

4. Quality control procedures.

5. Follow-up procedures.

6. Qualification of the appropriate testing and evaluation agency and personnel.

7. Other information deem.ed necessary.

113
Monitoring teams may at their own discretion sample production units for compliance.

Monitoring teams shall submit within 30 days after their review a final report to the

regional reciprocity vice chairman for submission to conference chairmen for distribution to

all delegates.

Funding shall be by participating states and organizations. (Team members)

PROCEDURES FOR PROMOTING ACCEPTANCE BY THE NATIONAL MOBILE HOME STANDARDS COMMITTEE OF

RECIPROCITY COMMITTEE PROPOSALS FOR REVISION IN COOPERATION WITH THE STANDARDS AND EVALUATION

COMMITTEE

(Adopted February 28, 1974)

(Procedures to be inserted when approved by Executive Committee)

MODEL RULES FOR THE LISTING OF ORGANIZATIONS (LABORATORIES AND AGENCIES) TO LABEL

INDUSTRIALIZED BUILDINGS

(Adopted July 15, 1971)

(Rules to be inserted later - about 10 pages.)

HPMA Design Guide HP-SG-71 , for structural properties of hardwood plywood (Copy available

from Hardwood Plywood Association, P. 0. Box 6246, Arlington, VA.)

Factory Follow-Up Test Program for Roof Trusses, November 10, 1972 , guide to be used in

establishing an acceptable minimum level of quality control. (Copy available from Underwriter's Laboratories, 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL.)

Method of Test for the Evaluation of Exterior Mobile Home Wall for Horizontal Wind Load , November 1, 1972 , for determining the structural adequacy of walls based on tests. (Copy

available from Underwriters' Laboratories, 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL.)

NBS Coordinated Evaluation System Project Preliminary Report . (Copy available from the

National Bureau of Standards, Washington, DC 20234.)

114
NBS-114A (REV. 7-73)

U.S. DEPT. OF COMM.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

1. PUBLICATION OR REPORT NO.

NBS SP-429

2, Gov't Accession

No.

3. Recipient's Accession No.

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Proceedings of the 7th Annual Conference of the

National Conference of States on Buildihg Codes

and Standards

5. Publication Date September 1975

6. Performing Organization Code

7. AUTHOR(S)

Sandra A. Berry, (Editor)

8. Performing Organ. Report No.

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20234

10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.

11. Contract/Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Complete Address (Street, City, State, ZIP)

National Bureau of Standards

Department of Commerce

Washington, D. C. 20234

13. Type of Report & Period

Covered

FINAL

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 75-24777

16. ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less factual summary of most si^ificant information. If document includes a significant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.)

The National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards had its formal

tieginning in Wisconsin in 1967. Its formation represented a response by the States to

recommendations for intergovernmental reforms in the area of building codes, prepared

ty the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations . The formative meeting held in

T^isconsin was a direct outgrowth of an earlier exploratory meeting, involving several

States, called by the National Bureau of Standards. At this meeting, the States represented discussed the idea of a national organization of the States similar to the

^ational Conference of Weights and Measures, assisted by the National Bureau of Standards,

leading to a cooperative solution regarding the multiple problems in the entire building

egulatory system.

The Governor of Wisconsin issued an invitation to the States to gather in Wisconsin

tjo address the problem, to develop an organization which could effectively respond to

this national need, and to consider the offer of assistance of the National Bureau of

Standards. Sixteen States attended this meeting and unanimously agreed to the formation

o|f the NCSBCS and to accept the secretariat role of the National Bureau of Standards.

The Conference is structured to develop many technical and general recommendations

in the field of comprehensive building code administration and its programs explore the

entire system of this important segment of governmental regulatory service.

The secretariat of the National Conference of States on Building Codes and Standards

ijs located in the Office of Building Standards and Codes Services, Center for Building

Technology, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234.

17. KEY WORDS (six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only the first letter of the first key word unless a proper name: separated by semicolons)

ASHRAE 90-P; building codes; mobile homes; NCSBCS

18. AVAILABILITY [Xj Unlimited

I

! For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

[x] Order From Sup. of Doc, U.S. Government Printing Off ice Washington, D.C. 20402, SD Cat. No. C13. 10:4Z9

I ! Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

Springfield, Virginia 22151

19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

UNCL ASSIFIED

21. NO. OF PAGES

129

20. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS PAGE)

UNCLASSIFIED

22. Price

$1.95

.6

1*

NBS TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS

PERIODICALS JOURNAL OF RESEARCH reports National Bureau

of Standards research and development in physics,

mathematics, and chemistry. It is published in two sections, available separately:

• Physics and Chemistry (Section A)

Papers of interest primarily to scientists working in these fields. This section covers a broad range of physical and chemical research, with major emphasis on

standards of physical measurement, fundamental constants, and properties of matter. Issued six times a

year. Annual subscription: Domestic, $17.00; Foreign,

$21.25.

• Mathematical Sciences (Section B)

Studies and compilations designed mainly for the mathematician and theoretical physicist. Topics in mathematical statistics, theory of experiment design, numerical analysis, theoretical physics and chemistry, logical

design and programming of computers and computer

systems. Short numerical tables. Issued quarterly. Annual subscription: Domestic, $9.00; Foreign, $11.25.

DIMENSIONS/NBS (formerly Technical News Bulletin) —This monthly magazine is published to inform

scientists, engineers, businessmen, industry, teachers,

students, and consumers of the latest advances in science and technology, with primary emphasis on the work at NBS. The magazine highlights and reviews such

issues as energy research, fire protection, building tech- nology, metric conversion, pollution abatement, health and safety, and consumer product performance. In addition, it reports the results of Bureau programs in measurement standards and techniques, properties of matter and materials, engineering standards and services, instrumentation, and automatic data processing.

Annual subscription: Domestic, $9.45; Foreign, $11.85.

NONPERIODICALS

Monographs—Major contributions to the technical liter- ature on various subjects related to the Bureau's scientific and technical activities. Handbooks—Recommended codes of engineering and

industrial practice (including safety codes) developed

in cooperation with interested industries, professional

organizations, and regulatory bodies.

Special Publications—Include proceedings of confer- ences sponsored by NBS, NBS annual reports, and other

special publications appropriate to this grouping such

as wall charts, pocket cards, and bibliographies.

Applied Mathematics Series—Mathematical tables,

manuals, and studies of special interest to physicists,

engineers, chemists, biologists, mathematicians, computer programmers, and others engaged in scientific and technical work.

National Standard Reference Data Series—Provides

quantitative data on the physical and chemical properties of materials, compiled from the world's literature and critically evaluated. Developed under a world-wide

program coordinated by NBS. Program under authority

of National Standard Data Act (Public Law 90-396).

NOTE: At present the principal publication outlet for these data is the Journal of Physical and Chemical

Reference Data (JPCRD) published quarterly for NBS

by the American Chemical Society (ACS) and the American Institute of Physics (AIP). Subscriptions, reprints,

and supplements available from ACS, 1155 Sixteenth

St. N. W., Wash. D. C. 20056.

Building Science Series—Disseminates technical infor- mation developed at the Bureau on building materials,

components, systems, and whole structures. The series presents research results, test methods, and performance criteria related to the structural and environmental functions and the durability and safety characteristics of building elements and systems.

Technical Notes—Studies or reports which are complete

in themselves but restrictive in their treatment of a

subject. Analogous to monographs but not so comprehensive in scope or definitive in treatment of the subject area. Often serve as a vehicle for final reports of work performed at NBS under the sponsorship of other

government agencies.

Voluntary Product Standards—Developed under pro- cedures published by the Department of Commerce in Pgrt 10, Title 15, of the Code of Federal Regulations.

The purpose of the standards is to establish nationally

recognized requirements for products, and to provide

all concerned interests with a basis for common understanding of the characteristics of the products. NBS

administers this program as a supplement to the activities of the private sector standardizing organizations.

Federal Information Processing Standards Publications

(FIPS PUBS)—Publications in this series collectively constitute the Federal Information Processing Standards Register. Register serves as the official source of information in the Federal Government regarding stand- ards issued by NBS pursuant to the Federal Property

and Administrative Services Act of 1949 as amended,

Public Law 89-306 (79 Stat. 1127), and as implemented

by Executive Order 11717 (38 FR 12315, dated May 11, 1973) and Part 6 of Title 15 CFR (Code of Federal

Regulations).

Consumer Information Series—Practical information,

based on NBS research and experience, covering areas

of interest to the consumer. Easily understandable

language and illustrations provide useful background

knowledge for shopping in today's technological

marketplace.

NBS Interagency Reports (NBSIR)—A special series of interim or final reports on work performed by NBS for

outside sponsors (both government and non-government). In general, initial distribution is handled by the sponsor; public distribution is by the National Technical

Information Service (Springfield, Va. 22161) in paper

copy or microfiche form.

Order NBS publications (except NBSIR's and Biblio- graphic Subscription Services) from: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington,

D.C. 20402. BIBLIOGRAPHIC SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES

The following current-awareness and literature-survey

bibliographies are issued periodically by the Bureau:

Cryogenic Data Center Current Awareness Service

A literature survey issued biweekly. Annual subscription: Domestic, $20.00; foreign, $25.00.

Liquefied Natural Gas. A literature survey issued quarterly. Annual subscription: $20.00.

Superconducting Devices and Materials. A literature

survey issued quarterly. Annual subscription: $20.00.

Send subscription orders and remittances for the pre- ceding bibliographic services to National Technical

Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22161.

Electromagnetic Metrology Current Awareness Service

Issued monthly. Annual subscription: $100.00 (Special rates for multi-subscriptions). Send subscription

order and remittance to Electromagnetics Division,

National Bureau of Standards, Boulder, Colo. .80302.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

lUational Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

COM-21 5

Penalty far Private Use, S^OO SPECIAL FOURTH-CLASS RATE

BOOK