Chart #2 – Tracking Chart with TAC Action: No Action

2018 Structural TAC – International Existing Building Code - Structural
Mods requested to be pulled from the consent agenda

Joe Crum (# of mods: 18)							
									
EB 12-16									
EB 13-16									
EB 14-16									
EB 17-16									
EB 18-16									
EB 19-15									
EB 26-16									
EB 36-16									
EB 42-16									
EB 44-16									
EB 48-16									
EB 49-16									
EB 51-16									
EB 52-16									
EB 53-16									
EB 6-16									
EB 68-15 Part I									
EB 68-15 Part II									

									
									
Total # of mods in chart: 41							
									
Total # of unpulled mods: 23							

									

									

									

									

									

									

2018 International Existing Building Code – Structural – NO ACTION

Structural TAC

IEBC
Code Change No.	IEBC 
Section 	Change Summary b/t 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC 	Change Summary b/t 2017 FEBC and 2018 IEBC	Staff comments	
EB 10-15	New 301.1
New 301.2

301.1
301.1.1
301.1.2
301.1.3
401.1
401.1.1
401.1.2.2
404
501.1
501.1.1
502
1401.1
1401.1.1
1401.2.4
	Modifies Chapter 6 to Chapter 4 “Repairs”.  Modifies Section 301 “Administration”.  Modifies 301.1 “General”, 301.2 “Repairs”, 301.3 “Alteration, change of occupancy, addition or relocation”, 301.3.1 “Prescriptive compliance method”, 301.3.2 “Work area compliance method”, 301.3.3 “Performance compliance method”, 401.1 “Scope”, 401.1.1 “Compliance with other methods”, 401.2.2 “New and replacement materials”. Deletes Section 404 “Repairs”. Modifies text of Section 501.1 “Scope”, 501.1.1 Compliance with other alternatives. Deletes Section 502 “Repairs”. Modifies text of Section 1401.1 “Scope”, 1401.1.1 “Compliance with other methods”, 1401.2.4 “Alterations and repairs”. 

This section corrects section numbering and references in FBC, EB Chapter 3 after creating new section 303 and removes duplicate details which will now be part of section 303 if approved. This proposal will make the repair provisions more consistent for each method.  The committee felt that having a standalone chapter for repairs will make the code more clear.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is only to clarify the existing code requirements through relocation (reorganization) of code sections, so there is no intended increase or decrease expected by approving this proposal.

	This change is not similar to that of the FEBC. The FEBC provides for Florida specific changes to these sections 	Overlapping provision to be considered during step 2 of the code change process  

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

X

	

	

	
EB 1-16	(New) 202
(New) 402.2
(New) 606.2.2
	Adds new definition “DISPROPORTIONATE EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE”. Adds new 402.2 “Disproportionate earthquake damage”, 606.2.2 “Disproportionate earthquake damage”. This proposal complements and completes the code's current intent: To identify especially vulnerable buildings at critical
points in their useful lives, and to require evaluation and possibly upgrade. Current provisions already identify substantially damaged buildings and, for those found to be especially vulnerable, the code requires a seismic upgrade.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction.
For buildings in regions of high seismicity that sustain unexpected, or "disproportionate," earthquake damage, the proposed provision will increase the costs associated with post-earthquake repair. It is also likely that the upgrades so triggered will significantly REDUCE repair costs in subsequent damaging events.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed – seismic provisions. 

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 12-16
▲▲▲	(New) 303
(New) 303.1
[BS] 402.3.1
[BS] 403.3.1
[BS] 807.3

	Adds news Section 303 “Design Loads”. Deletes section [BS] 402.3.1 “Design live load”, [BS] 403.3.1 “Design live load”, [BS] 807.3 “Minimum design loads”. Alters language regarding Design Live Loads and minimum design loads.
This proposal reconciles differences between similar provisions in the Prescriptive and Work Area methods and moves the reconciled provision to Chapter 3.  The proposal replaces three sections, generally implementing the preferred and more complete provisions from Sections 402.3.1 and 403.3.1 (and 404.3, made moot by Group A EB 10). Because the reconciled provision applies to multiple methods and to
multiple project types, and because it contains no project-specific triggers or exceptions, it is suitable for Chapter 3.  The code change was further modified by the Committee.  The modification further clarifies the live load provision, incorporating current wording.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
Reorganization and consolidation only. The cost of placarding might increase, but it is not included as part of the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 13-16
▲▲▲	(New) 303
(New) 303.1
	Modifies text of SECTION 303 “IN-SITU LOAD TESTS”, Modifies text of Section 303.1 “General”. Adds new language regarding In-SITU Load Tests. The in-situ load test provisions in the IBC are used for both new and existing buildings. The IEBC does not currently contain provisions for load tests of existing buildings but needs to, as in-situ load testing is a valid means of assessing an existing structure's or an existing component's strength.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal has no cost implications, as the provisions in IBC Section 1708 were already intended to apply to both new and existing buildings. This proposal simply clarifies that the in-situ load test provisions of IBC Section 1708 can still be used to assess existing structures.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 14-16
▲▲▲	401.3
[BS] 606.1	Modifies text of Section 302.2 “Dangerous conditions”, [BS] 606.1 “General”. This proposal renumbers section 401.3 to 301.2 and relocates the key provision for Dangerous buildings.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is editorial, therefore there is no change in construction requirements
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 15-16	[BS] 1103.2
[BS] 1103.4
[BS] 402.3	Modifies text of [BS] 402.3 “Existing structural elements carrying gravity load”, [BS] 1103.2 “Additional gravity loads”. Deletes Section 1103.4 “Snow drift loads”. The basic intent of these three sections is the same: Gravity load increases of 5% or more, as well as capacity reductions, require redesign. However, the three sections differ in their wording, in their explicit inclusion of snow drift effects, and in their exceptions.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
Could REDUCE the cost of construction, since an exception is added to the Prescriptive method.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action is needed for 1103.4.  Section 1103.4 provides for snow load requirement.

     TAC Action

XX

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 17-16
▲▲▲	[BS] 1103.3
[BS] 1103.3.1
[BS] 1103.3.2
[BS] 1103.3.3
[BS] 402.4	Modifies text of Section [BS] 402.4 “Existing structural elements carrying lateral load”, [BS] 1103.3 “Lateral force-resisting system”. Deletes section [BS] 1103.3.1 “Vertical addition”, [BS] 1103.3.2 “Horizontal addition”, [BS] 1103.3.3 “Voluntary addition of structural elements to improve the lateral force-resisting system”. This proposal makes corresponding sections of the Prescriptive and Work Area methods identical. The only substantive difference between the current provisions is that the current WAM provision includes the light-frame exception, so this is added to the Prescriptive provision. Otherwise, all of the revisions shown are editorial.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
Could REDUCE the cost of construction through a new exception to the Prescriptive method.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 18-16
▲▲▲	[BS] 403.3
[BS] 707.2
[BS] 807.4

	Modifies section  [BS] 403.3 “Existing structural elements carrying gravity load”, [BS] 707.2 “Addition or replacement of roofing or replacement of equipment”, [BS] 807.4 “Existing structural elements carrying gravity loads”. The basic intent of these three sections is the same: Gravity load increases of 5% or more, as well as capacity reductions, require redesign. However, the three sections differ in their wording, in their explicit inclusion of snow drift effects, and in their exceptions.  This proposal provides correlation between the prescriptive and work area methods, improving upon the current wording so that the requirements are more understandable. The code change was further modified by the Committee.  The modification corrects mistakes in the original proposal.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction.
The proposed change could increase OR DECREASE the cost of construction. By reconciling the two methods, a common-sense snow provision has been added to the Prescriptive method, but two exceptions have been added as well.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 19-15
▲▲▲	402.1
403.1
407.1
601.2
608.1
805.2
[BS] 403.9
[BS] 807.6

	Modifies section 402.1 “General”, 403.1 “General”, [BS] 403.9 “Voluntary seismic improvements”, 407.1 “Compliance”, 601.2 “Compliance”, 608.1 “General”, 805.2 “General”, [BS] 807.6 “Voluntary lateral force-resisting system alterations”.

This proposal changes the word Conformance to Compliance. This proposal was editorial in nature and the phrase “complying with” is preferred over “conforming to. This is an editorial proposal that adds clarity and consistency. The appropriate phrase is "no less complying," not "no less
conforming." "Complying" is also the term with greater precedent and preference, as seen in sections 301.1, 406.2, 407.1, 410, 702, 705, 803, 805, 903, 1012, 1203, and 1204.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
The proposal is entirely editorial.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 20-16	[BS] 403.4
[BS] 807.5
	Modifies text of Section [BS] 403.4 “Existing structural elements carrying lateral load”, [BS] 807.5 “Existing structural elements resisting lateral loads”. This proposal makes corresponding sections of the Prescriptive and Work Area methods identical. It makes a number of editorial revisions (listed below) and one substantive change. The substantive change is this: Currently, for exactly the same situations, Section 807.5 allows the use of reduced seismic loads, while Section 403.4 does not.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
Could actually REDUCE the cost of certain triggered upgrades. Otherwise, editorial.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 21-16	[BS] 403.4.1
[BS] 403.6
[BS] 403.7
	Modifies text of Section [BS] 403.4.1 “Seismic Design Category F”, [BS] 403.6 “Wall anchorage for unreinforced masonry walls in major alterations”, [BS] 403.7 “Bracing for unreinforced masonry parapets in major alterations”. This proposal revises these provisions more consistent with the work area method which would only address alterations
that have reconfigured space over 50% of the building. This proposal limits the area of alterations to the defined term; "work area".  This will prevent the inclusion of other areas, such as portions of the building where incidental work is being performed.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal will not increase the cost of construction as it limits the area of alteration to the work area.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed. 
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 22-16	[BS] 403.4.1	Modifies text of Section [BS] 403.4.1 “Seismic Design Category F”. This proposal reconciles a substantive difference between the Work Area and Prescriptive methods.  Current section 403.4.1 already has a seismic evaluation/retrofit trigger that matches section 907.4.3, but 907.4.3 also has a wind requirement. This proposal adds a matching wind  requirement to the Prescriptive provision.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction.
Cost-beneficial cost increase, only for SDC F buildings with high wind loads undergoing major alterations.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 23-16	[BS] 403.4.1
[BS] 907.4.3	Modifies text of Section [BS] 403.5 “Seismic Design Category F”, [BS] “907.5 Seismic Design Category F”. This proposal simplifies and clarifies the wording of corresponding proposals in the Work Area and Prescriptive methods.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is editorial, therefore there is no change in construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed 
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 26-16
▲▲▲	(New) 907.4.6
[BS] 403.5
[BS] 403.6
[BS] 403.7
[BS] 707.3.1
[BS] 907.4.5
[BS] 907.4.6

	Modifies text of Section [BS] 403.5 “Bracing for unreinforced masonry parapets upon reroofing”, [BS] 403.6 “Anchorage for unreinforced masonry walls in major alteration”, [BS] “403.7 Bracing for unreinforced masonry parapets in major alterations”, [BS] 707.3.1 “Bracing for unreinforced masonry bearing wall parapets., Anchorage for concrete and reinforced masonry walls”, [BS] 907.4.7 “Bracing for unreinforced masonry parapets”. Adds new Section 907.4.6 “Anchorage for unreinforced masonry walls”.

This proposal makes editorial improvements to matching provisions from the Prescriptive and Work Area methods.
403.5: Replace the "75 percent" design criteria with a simpler and more correct call out for reduced seismic loads. The intent is to match the use of reduced loads already in the Work Area method (907.4.5).

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
These requirements are editorial, therefore there will be no change in construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 27-16	[BS] 403.6
[BS] 907.4.5
	Modifies Section [BS] 403.6 “Wall anchorage for unreinforced masonry walls in major alterations”, [BS] 907.4.5 “Wall anchors for concrete and masonry buildings”. This proposal extends the URM mitigation requirement for Level 3 alteration projects.  Currently, Level 3 alterations trigger URM parapet bracing and anchors at the roof line in both the Work Area and Prescriptive methods. …Feasible practice in Massachusetts and California indicate that URM
walls should be anchored at floor levels as well, in order to achieve even basic collapse prevention performance. (IEBC Appendix A1 and ASCE 41 Chapter 15 say the same.)

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction.
A small additional cost with a high benefit-cost ratio for URM buildings with major alterations. No additional cost for lesser
alterations.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 28-16	(New) 403.7	Adds new Section “403.7 Anchorage for concrete and reinforced masonry walls”. This proposal resolves an inconsistency between the Work Area method and the Prescriptive method. Currently, the Work Area method has a sensible provision that requires roof-to-wall anchors in Level 3 Alterations for concrete and reinforced masonry walls as well as URM walls (907.4.5) but the Prescriptive method addresses only URM walls (403.6). This proposal adds a matching proposal for concrete and RM walls to the Prescriptive method.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction
For certain buildings, including vulnerable tilt-ups, undergoing major alterations. No change for other buildings or lesser alterations
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed 
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 29-16	(New) 403.8
(New) 907.4.7

	Adds new Section 403.8 “Anchorage of unreinforced masonry partitions in major alterations”, 907.4.7 “Anchorage of unreinforced masonry partitions”.  This proposal adds a proactive mitigation trigger to address a common nonstructural falling hazard.  Currently, both the Prescriptive and Work Area methods include mitigation requirements for URM parapets and bearing walls, triggered by major (Level 3) alterations. A related hazard involves the failure of interior unreinforced masonry partitions, especially around stairwells and egress corridors.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction.
The cost increase is for URM partitions only, and only within the work area and egress paths. Where the intended work already involves partition alteration, there is no cost increase.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 3-16	[A] 101.6
202
[BS] 404.2
[BS] 404.2.3
[BS] 606.2.2
[BS] 606.2.2.3
[BS] 606.2.3.1
[BS] A101.1
[BS] A501.1
[BS] A503.1

	Modifies text of Section [BS] 404.2 “Substantial structural damage to vertical elements of the lateral force-resisting
System”, [BS] 404.2.3 “Extent of repair for noncompliant buildings”, [BS] 404.2.3 “Extent of repair for noncompliant buildings”, [BS] 404.3.1 “Lateral force-resisting elements”, [BS] 606.2.2 “Substantial structural damage to vertical elements of the lateral force-resisting system”, [BS] 606.2.2.3 “Extent of repair for noncompliant buildings”, [BS] 606.2.3.1 “Lateral force-resisting elements”, [A] 101.6 “Appendices”, [BS] A101.1 “Purpose”, [BS] A501.1 “Purpose”, [BS] A503.1 “General”. Deletes definition [BS] REHABILITATION, SEISMIC. Language to improve seismic lateral force resistance. The provisions of this chapter are intended as minimum standards for structural seismic resistance, and are established primarily to reduce the risk of life loss or injury. Compliance with the provisions in this chapter will not necessarily prevent loss of life or injury or prevent earthquake damage to the rehabilitated retrofitted buildings. The proposal removes an unnecessary definition -- Seismic Rehabilitation -- and updates the related wording throughout the code from "rehabilitation" to "retrofit." (Sections where "rehabilitation" is used to mean anything other than seismic or wind upgrade remain unchanged, as does the definition of Rehabilitation as a stand-alone term.)  The term rehabilitation" appears throughout the code, but almost always in the context of "seismic rehabilitation" -- but without the modifier "seismic." Thus, the existence of these two definitions is inconsistent with the code text and potentially confusing. The proposal removes this confusion by using the preferred term, "retrofit" wherever seismic or wind improvements are at issue.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The change is editorial so there are not changes to construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed on the change to 202 and Appendix A as these changes are seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 33-16	[BS] 403.9
[BS] 807.6

	Modifies Section [BS] 403.9 “Voluntary lateral force-resisting system alterations”, [BS] 807.6 “Voluntary lateral force-resisting system alterations”. This proposal reconciles differences between the voluntary retrofit provisions in the Prescriptive and Work Area methods. The main purpose of the proposal is to provide identical wording in each method. To do this, the proposal simplifies the base provision in each case and borrows bits from each current provision, with two objectives.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is a clarification of intent, with editorial changes. There is no change to construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action is needed for 403.9.  Section 403.9 provides for seismic requirement.

     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 36-16
▲▲▲	407.1
(New) 407.4
(New) 407.4.1
(New) 407.4.2
(New) 407.4.4
[BS] 407.4

	Modifies text of Section 407.1 “Conformance”, [BS] 407.4.3 “Seismic loads”. Adds new Section 407.4.1 “Live loads”, 407.4.2 “Snow and wind loads”, 407.4.4 “Access to Risk Category IV”. This proposal reconciles substantive differences between the Prescriptive method and the Work Area method.  Currently, the Prescriptive method has only one load-specific structural provision related to change of occupancy -- 407.4, which triggers a seismic upgrade (with exceptions) when the risk category increases.  The proposed wording matches the editorial revisions being proposed separately to corresponding sections of 1007.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
It will actually decrease the cost of construction by introducing exceptions not currently available to users of the prescriptive method.  
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 4-15	202	Adds new definition “[A] EXISTING BUILDING”.  

The IEBC uses both the terms “existing building’ and ‘existing structure’, but only defines ‘existing building’. The IBC only defines ‘existing structure’.  

Cost Impact: this proposal will not affect the cost of construction because it merely adds a definition.
	This change is not similar to that of the FEBC. The FEBC provides for Florida specific changes to this definition	Overlapping provision to be considered during step 2 of the code change process  

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

X

	

	

	
EB 4-16	202
[BS] 301.1.4.1
Table [BS]
301.1.4.1
[BS] 301.1.4.2
Table [BS]
301.1.4.2	Modifies text of [BS] SEISMIC FORCES, [BS] 301.1.4.1 Compliance with full seismic forces. Modifies title of Table [BS]  301.1.4.1 to “PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR USE IN ASCE 41 FOR COMPLIANCE WITH  FULL SEISMIC FORCES”, TABLE [BS] 301.1.4.2 “PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR USE IN ASCE 41 FOR COMPLIANCE WITH REDUCED SEISMIC FORCES”. This proposal simplifies the code's terminology, increasing usability and reducing potential errors.  The terms "International Building Code-level seismic forces" and "reduced International Building Code-level seismic forces" are unwieldy and potentially confusing. The long terms disrupt a reader's flow. The use of two long labels, one of which is entirely embedded in the other, is a recipe for confusion and error. Further, one could argue that neither term is actually technically accurate either, since the listed criteria actually allow sometimes significant departures from the IBC's prescriptive provisions (which themselves adopt ASCE 7).

NOTE: The proposal does not show every place where one of the two current terms would need to be replaced. If the proposal is approved, this can be done by staff during the course of editing.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This change is editorial, so there are no changes to construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed 
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 42-16
▲▲▲	(New) 302.4.1
801.3
[BS] 606.1
[BS] 807.2
	Adds new Section 302.4.1 “New structural members and connections”. Modifies text of Section [BS] 606.1 “General”, 801.3 “Compliance”. Deletes text of Section [BS] 807.2 “New structural elements”. This proposal relocates multiple overlapping provisions to Chapter 3 and provides a necessary exception to account for alternative seismic criteria.  The code change was further modified by the Committee. The modification rewords the new exception to make it a permitted option.  

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
Clarification of current intent, with some possible cost decrease
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

XX

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 43-16	(New) 606.2.1.1
[BS] 606.2.1	Modifies text of Section [BS] 606.2.1 “Repairs for less than substantial structural damage”.  Adds text of Section 606.2.1.1 “Snow damage”. This proposal adds a limited and minor upgrade requirement for structural damage caused by snow.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction
There will be a slight increase in the cost of construction, but only the damaged elements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action is needed for 606.2.1.1 Section 606.2.1.1 provides for snow load requirement.

     TAC Action

XX

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 44-16
▲▲▲	[BS] 606.2.3.1	Modifies text of Section [BS] 606.2.3.1 “Lateral force-resisting elements”. This is a simple correction. The provision intends to refer to the vertical elements of the LFRS, as covered in 606.2.2.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is an editorial correction; therefore there is no change to construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 48-16
▲▲▲	[BS] 907.1
	Modifies Section [BS] 907.1 “General”. This proposal clarifies the intended application of section 907. As written, 907 applies to "Level 3 alterations including structural alterations." This wording is unclear. Committee Reason: This code change clarifies the IEBC by removing confusing verbiage, because it is agreed that level 3 alterations should require compliance with Section 907.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is a clarification of current intent so there is no change to construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 49-16
▲▲▲	[BS] 907.2
[BS] 907.3
[BS] 907.4
[BS] 907.4.1
[BS] 907.4.2
[BS] 907.4.3
[BS] 907.4.4
[BS] 907.4.5
[BS] 907.4.6
	Deletes Section [BS] 907.2 “New structural elements”, [BS] 907.3 “Existing structural elements carrying gravity loads”, [BS] 907.4.1 “Evaluation and analysis”, [BS] 907.4.2 “Substantial structural alteration”, [BS] 907.4.4 “Limited structural alteration”. Modifies text of Section [BS] 907.4 “Existing load-resisting system”, [BS] 907.5 “Seismic Design Category F”, [BS] 907.6 “Wall anchors for concrete and masonry buildings”, [BS] 907.7 “Bracing for unreinforced masonry parapets”. This proposal simplifies Section 907, removing duplication and clarifying the intent.  The committee agreed that this code change provides needed clarifications, simplifications and reorganization of Section IEBC 907.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is an editorial clarification of current intent, therefore there will be not change in construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 50-16	(New) 202
[BS] 1007.1
[BS] 1007.2
[BS] 1007.3.2
	Adds new definition “RISK CATEGORY”. Modifies text of [BS] 1007.1 “Live loads”, [BS] 1007.2 “Snow and wind loads”, [BS] 1007.3.2 “Access to Risk Category IV”. This proposal makes editorial changes for consistency, clarity, and simplification. The revisions use the preferred wording and logic approved for other sections in recent code cycles, so as to make the structural provisions more uniformly understandable and enforceable throughout the IEBC

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is an editorial change, so there will be no change to construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action is needed for 1007.3.2. Section 1007.3.2 provides for seismic requirement.

     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 51-16
▲▲▲	[BS] 1007.2	Modifies text of Section [BS] 1007.2 “Snow and wind loads”. Table 1604.5 of the IBC is not about wind or snow categories; it is entitled "Risk Category of Buildings and Other
Structures". To say that a change in the nature of the occupancy results in a higher wind or snow category is inaccurate, so this proposal deletes that language.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposed modification does not change the requirement, so cost is not impacted.

	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 52-15	601.2
608.1	Modifies text of Section 601.2 “Conformance”, 608.1 “General”. The current text talks about the condition "before the repair was undertaken." This means the damaged condition. What these provisions intend is to restore the condition that existed before the damage, not before the repair.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal is editorial.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

XX

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 52-16
▲▲▲	[BS] 1007.3
[BS] 1007.3.1
[BS] 1007.3.2
	Deletes Section [BS] 1007.3 “Seismic Loads”. Modifies text of Section [BS] 1007.3 “Seismic loads”, Section [BS] 1007.4 “Access to Risk Category IV”.  This proposal makes Section 1007.3.2 more general. It recognizes that access to a newly reclassified Risk Category IV building is important with respect to wind and snow damage as well as earthquake damage.  By re-numbering 1007.3.2 as its own section, it will now apply to more than just seismic loads.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. In the rare cases where an existing RC I, II or III building is reclassified to RC IV and is served by an adjacent RC I, II, or III structure, this proposal might lead to increase costs to improve resistance to wind and snow.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 53-16
▲▲▲	[BS] 1103.1
[BS] 1103.3.3	Deletes Section [BS] 1103.1 “Compliance with the International Building Code”, [BS] 1103.3.3 “Voluntary addition of structural elements to improve the lateral force-resisting system”. This proposal removes two small sections that are entirely redundant. Current 1103.1 is redundant with respect to 1101.1. Current 1103.3.3 is redundant with respect to 807.6, to which it points. In addition, 1103.3.3 should be removed from Chapter 11 because "addition of structural elements" is not about Additions.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is editorial, so there will be no change in construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 58-16	APPENIX A
Ch A1
Chapter A6
	Modifies text of Section [BS] A102.1 “General”, SECTION A104 “SYMBOLS AND NOTATIONS”, SECTION A105 “GENERAL REQUIREMENTS”, [BS] A105.1 “General”, [BS]  A105.3 “Requirements for plans”, [BS] A105.4 “Structural observation, testing and inspection”, A106.1 “Condition of Existing materials”, [BS] A106.2 “Existing unreinforced masonry”. [BS] A106.2.1 “General”, [BS] A106.2.2 “Lay-up of walls”, [BS] A106.2.2.1 “Header in multi-wythe solid brick”, [BS] A106.2.2.2 “Concrete masonry units and structural clay load-bearing tile”. [BS] A106.2.2.3 “Other lay-up patterns”,  [BS] A106.2.3 “Testing of masonry”. [BS] A106.2.3.1 “In-place mortar tests”. [BS] A106.2.3.2 “Alternative procedures for testing masonry”, [BS] A106.2.3.3 “Location of tests”, [BS] A106.2.3.4 “Number of tests”, [BS] A106.2.3.5 “Minimum quality of mortar”, [BS] A106.2.3.6 “Minimum quality of masonry”, [BS] A106.2.3.7 “Collar joints.”, [BS] A106.2.3.8 “Unreinforced masonry classes”, [BS] A106.2.3.9 “Pointing”, [BS] A107.3 “Existing wall anchors”, [BS] A107.4 “New bolts wall anchors”, [BS] A107.5 “Tests of anchors in unreinforced masonry walls”. [BS] A107.5.1 “Direct tension testing of existing anchors and new anchors”, [BS] A107.5.2 “Torque testing of new anchors”, [BS] A107.5.3 “Prequalification tests for non-conforming anchors”, [BS] A108.1 “Strength Values”, [BS] A108.2 “Masonry shear strength”, [BS] A108.3 “Masonry compression”, [BS] A108.5 “Wall tension anchors”. [BS] A108.6 “Foundations”. [BS] A109.2 “Selection of procedure”,  [BS] A110.1 “Minimum design lateral forces”, [BS] A110.2 “Seismic forces on elements of structures”, [BS] A110.3 “In-plane loading of URM shear walls and frames’, [BS] A110.4 “Redundancy and overstrength factors”, [BS] A111.1 “Limits for the application of this procedure”, [BS] A111.2 “Seismic forces on elements of structures”, [BS] A111.3.1 “Crosswall definition”, [BS] A111.4.2 “Demand-capacity ratios”, [BS] A111.5 “Diaphragm shear transfer”, [BS] A111.6.1 “Wall story force”, [BS] A111.6.2 “Wall story shear”, [BS] A111.6.4 “New seismic force-resisting elements”,  [BS] A111.8 “Open-front design procedure”, [BS] A112.2 “In-plane shear of unreinforced masonry walls”, [BS] A112.2.2 “Shear walls with openings”,  [BS] A112.3 “Plywood-sheathed shear walls”, [BS] A112.4.1 “Seismic-force distribution”, [BS] A112.4.2 “Moment-resisting frames”, SECTION A113 “DETAILED BUILDING SYSTEM DESIGN REQUIREMENTS”, [BS] A113.1.2 “Anchor requirements”, [BS] A113.1.3 “Minimum wall anchorage”, [BS] A113.2 “Diaphragm shear transfer”, [BS] A113.6 “Parapets”, TABLE A1-B “ALLOWABLE VALUE OF HEIGHT-TO-THICKNESS RATIO OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY WALLS”, TABLE A1-E “STRENGTH VALUES OF NEW MATERIALS USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH EXISTING CONSTRUCTION”. Adds new Standard ASTM C1531-15, “Standard Test Methods for In Situ Measurement Of Masonry Mortar Joint Shear Strength Index”. Adds new definitions “BED JOINT”, “DETAILED BUILDING SYSTEM ELEMENTS”, “HEAD JOINT”.  Modifies definition “[BS] “CROSSWALL”, “[BS] FLEXIBLE DIAPHRAGM”, “[BS] OPEN FRONT”, “[BS] RIGID DIAPHRAGM”, “[BS] UNREINFORCED MASONRY (URM)”, “[BS] UNREINFORCED MASONRY (URM) WALL”, “[BS] UNREINFORCED MASONRY BEARING WALL”. Deletes [BS] A106.1 “General”, [BS[ A107.5 “Reports”. 

Appendix A1 was first introduced to the legacy code UCBC by the proponent (SEAOC) in or about 1990. During the
intervening years, varies standards have been developed with practical considerations to users of the Appendix A1 in retrofitting URM buildings. Appendix A1 closely aligns with the ASCE 41-13 in Reduced Performance Objective, a Collapse Prevention Performance level (S-5) for BSE-1E Seismic Hazard Level demands. The special procedure under Appendix A1 is consistent with the Tier 2 deficiency-based procedures of ASCE 41-13 Chapter 5 for this Performance Objective. An Ad Hoc Committee was
convened under the direction of SEAOC Exisiting Building Committee. The Ad Hoc Committee was chaired by Fred Turner, Staff Structural Engineer with the California Alfred E. Alquist Seismic Safety Commission, and who also chairs ASCE 41-17 Masonry Team. Participants in the Ad Hoc Committee includes delegates from Structural Engineers Associations of California and of Washington. The proposed modifications are essentially editorial, including removal of text where ASTM standards are available, and coordination between the Appendix A1 and ASCE 41 chapter 15.
Committee Reason: The proposed modification restores the original language of Item 3 with a slight editorial modification.
The phrase "substantiating research data or engineering judgment" gives the code official some guidance about when to approve materials, and gives some authority to require research or engineering data to support the use of unusual materials. The word "new" is deleted so that the item will apply to any material that isn't specified in the code.
Proposal EB2-15 in Group A established that the term "code official" would be used consistently in the IEBC instead of "building official"

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. No cost impact for URM buildings six stories or less. For buildings taller than six stories, the explicit limit serves to guide user to use the body of International Existing Building Code. The updated definition for unreinforced masonry wall, based on whether wall reinforcement meets the building code requirements for reinforced masonry walls, will have a cost impact. As a minimum, lightly reinforced masonry walls need to be evaluated by a design professional in meeting the minimum life-safety and performance objectives intended in the building code. This will increase the cost to engage a design professional, but will have no overall impact on construction cost.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 60-16	[BS] A301.2	Modifies Section [BS] A301.2 “Scope”. The purpose of this code change is to coordinate the exceptions to Section A303 with the Group R occupancies and uses in the IBC. The original scope of this appendix in the UBC was limited to single-family homes, duplexes, and other small congregate residences. Proposal EB78-04/05 modified the scope and exception to replace the reference to UBC Group R, Division 1 with the what was intended to be the appropriate Group R categories in the IBC. The modification was not quite correct.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The original intent was for the provisions of Appendix A3 to apply to single family homes, including small group homes, for reasons of public health and safety. This proposal restores that intent. This is an allowance for group homes to utilize Appendix A3, not an additional requirement.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 61-16	[BS] A304.3.1
(New) [BS] Table A3-A
	Modifies text of Section [BS] A304.3.1 “Existing perimeter foundations”. Modifies text of Table [BS] TABLE [BS] TABLE A3-A “SILL PLATE ANCHORAGE AND CRIPPLE WALL BRACING”. This code change will permit alternative methods of fastening the floor framing to the foundation system. The modification adds the word "minimum" so that the it won't require a connection capacity of exactly 900 pounds.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal will not increase the cost of construction. It simply provides for an alternate type of connection to be provided, at the choice of the designer, installer, or homeowner.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed 
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 6-16
▲▲▲	(New) 202
[BS] 907.4.2
	Adds new Definition “SUBSTANTIAL STRUCTURAL ALTERATION”.  Modifies text of Section [BS] 907.4.2 “Substantial structural alteration”. The proposal takes existing wording from Section 907.4.2 that is already written as a de facto definition and makes into an actual definition in Chapter 2. This simplifies Section 907.4.2 and improves the consistency of the code with respect to similar concepts and definitions. Section 907.4.4, which references the term already, need not be revised. In making the change, some redundant commentary-like text (about tributary areas and listing types of gravity load carrying elements) is removed for clarity, with no loss of substance.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal is an editorial clarification so there are not changes in construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 68-15 Part I
▲▲▲	(New) 1106
(New) 1106.1
(New) 1106.1.1
(New) 1106.1.2
(New) 1401.2.3.1
(New) 402.6

	Adds new section 1106 “STORM SHELTERS”. THIS IS A 2 PART CODE CHANGE PROPOSAL. BOTH PARTS WERE HEARD BY THE IEBC COMMITTEE. As documented in the proposal that created the original requirements for installation of storm shelters in schools for the 2015 IBC, even schools built to modern building codes are susceptible to collapse during tornadoes. Another positive trend in school shelter construction is that some of these facilities are also being made available as public shelters.  At these shelters, the doors are automatically unlocked when the tornado siren sounds.  The proposal was approved as it provides necessary guidance on how to address storm shelters for additions.  Additions are treated as new buildings and the provisions for storm shelters need to correlate with the IBC. There was some concern that perhaps the formatting could be simplified with a more general reference to the IBC for the detailed requirements. Also, since this is applicable to all three methods potentially this could be addressed in Chapter 3.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. This proposal will increase the cost of construction. The most recent information on costs is available in FEMA P-361, Design and Construction Guidance for Community Safe Rooms (Second Edition, August, 2008).
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 68-15 Part II
▲▲▲	423
423.1.1
423.4
(New) 423.4.1
(New) 423.4.2	Modifies Section 423.1.1 “Scope”, 423.4 “Group E occupancies”. Adds new Section 423.4.1 “Required occupant capacity”, 423.4.2 “Location”. THIS IS A 2 PART CODE CHANGE PROPOSAL. BOTH PARTS WERE HEARD BY THE IEBC COMMITTEE. As documented in the proposal that created the original requirements for installation of storm shelters in schools for the 2015 IBC, even schools built to modern building codes are susceptible to collapse during tornadoes. That proposal described a number of schools destroyed or severely damaged in several 2011 tornadoes in Missouri, Georgia, and Alabama. As documented in the National Institute of Standards and Technology's final report on its technical investigation of the Joplin, Missouri tornado of May 22, 2011, that one storm severely damaged or destroyed 10 of the 20 public schools in the City of Joplin, and several parochial schools.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. This proposal will increase the cost of construction. The most recent information on costs is available in FEMA P-361, Design and Construction Guidance for Community Safe Rooms (Second Edition, August, 2008).
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC		
     TAC Action

X

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

	

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 8-15	301.1
[BS] 301.1.4
[BS] 301.1.4.1
[BS] Table     301.1.1.4.1
[BS] 301.1.4.2
[BS] Table 301.1.1.4.2
NEW 303
New 303.1
New 303.1.1
New Table [BS] 303.1.1
New [BS] 303.1.2	Modification of Section 301 “Administration”, Section [BS] 303.1 “General”, [BS] 303.1.1 “Compliance with International Building Code-level seismic forces”. Modifies [BS] 303.1.2 “Compliance with reduced International Building Code-level seismic forces.” Modifies text of 303.1.1 “PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR USE IN ASCE 41 FOR COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE-LEVEL SEISMIC FORCES”, Table [BS] 303.1.2 “PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR USE IN ASCE 41 FOR COMPLIANCE WITH REDUCED INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE-LEVEL SEISMIC FORCES”.  Adds text of Section 303 “SEISMIC EVALUATION AND DESIGN PROCEDURES”.

This proposal will move the seismic evaluation and design procedures out of the same section of 330 and code hierarchy as the three compliance methods and places it in its own section New 303. Modification by public comment.

Cost Impact: Code proposal is only to clarify the existing code requirements through a relocation (reorganization) of code sections, so there is no intended increase or decrease expected by approving this proposal.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed – seismic provisions. 

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 8-16	A501
A502
A503
A504
A505
A506
A507
[BS] 301.1.4.2

	Modifies text of [BS] 301.1.4.2 “Compliance with reduced International Building Code-level seismic forces”, Deletes Chapter Part A5 “EARTHQUAKE HAZARD REDUCTION IN EXISTING CONCRETE BUILDINGS”. This proposal affects Appendix A, Chapter 5 regarding compliance with codes related to seismic forces. This proposal deletes Chapter A5 from Appendix A. With recent revisions to both Chapter A5 and ASCE 41, this appendix chapter is no longer needed and provides no benefit relative to the procedures in ASCE 41 that are already allowed by the IEBC.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is redundancy with reference standard, so there will be no change in construction
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
EB 9-16	[BS] 301.1.4.2	Modifies text of [BS] 301.1.4.2 “Compliance with reduced International Building Code-level seismic forces”, Modifies text of Table [BS] 301.1.4.2 “PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR USE IN ASCE 41 FOR COMPLIANCE WITH REDUCED INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE-LEVEL SEISMIC FORCES”. This proposal affects Appendix A, Chapter 5 regarding compliance with codes related to seismic forces and alters Table [BS] 301.1.4.2. This proposal updates the IEBC to be consistent with the revised performance objective definitions and terminology used in ASCE 41-17. For "reduced IBC-level seismic forces" the 2015 IEBC referenced the "Basic Performance Objective for Existing Buildings" (BPOE) using the BSE-1E level hazard and correlating performance levels by Risk Category.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The IEBC revisions and related revisions in ASCE 41-17 will not have a significant impact on construction cost except when compared to seismic evaluation and retrofit in the central and eastern United States performed using ASCE 41-13 as referenced in the 2015 IEBC.
	Same as change between 2015 IEBC and 2018 IEBC	No action needed
 Seismic provisions.

     TAC Action

     Accommodate Florida Specific Need:
     YES (Select Criteria)                                                     NO: 

 

     a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 

     Others (Explain):	Commission Action

Accommodate Florida Specific Need:

YES (Select Criteria)                                                               NO: 

 

a.  b.  c.      d.  e.  f. 
Others (Explain):	
    	
TAC	
Cmsn.	

       No Action Needed 	

X

	

  Overlapping provisions