Florida Building Commission

Building Code System
Uniform Implementation Evaluation Workshop

April 8, 2013—Meeting III

World Golf Village—500 South Legacy Trail—St. Augustine, Florida 32092—1.904.940.8000

Meeting Objectives

Ø To Approve Regular Procedural Topics (Agenda and Meeting Summary Report)

Ø To Review Key Issues Regarding Uniform Implementation of Building Code System

Ø To Discuss and Evaluate Acceptability of Recommendation to the Florida Building Commission

Ø To Consider Public Comment

Ø To Adopt Recommendations for Submittal to Florida Building Commission

Ø To Hear Reflections and Next Steps

Meeting Agenda—Monday, April 8, 2013
All Agenda Times—Including Adjournment—Are Approximate and Subject to Change
1:00 PM	A.)	Welcome and Opening	Browdy
	B.)	Agenda Review and Approval Meeting III (4/8/13)	Blair
	C.)	Review and Approval of Meeting II Summary Report (12/4/12)	Blair
	D.)	Review and Discussion of Key Issues and Options Review summary of issues for enhancing uniformity of the Code	Workgroup
	E.)	Discussion & Acceptability Ranking of Recommendation to FBC Review and discussion of draft recommendation	Workgroup
	F.)	General Public Comment	Blair
	G.)	Adoption of Recommendations for Submittal to FBC	Blair
	H.)	Project Reflections and Next Steps	Browdy
	I.)	Adjourn

Contact Information and Project Webpage

Jeff Blair; 850.644.6320; jblair@fsu.edu ; http://consensus.fsu.edu/FBC/BCSUIEWG.html

Project Overview and Membership

Overview

Building Code System Uniform Implementation Evaluation Workgroup

Chairman Browdy recommended the convening of a Workgroup to evaluate the uniform implementation of the Florida Building Code System. The Chair reported to the Commission that the Commission’s statutory authority is currently limited to Code issues, updates, code administration, interpretations, energy efficiency, accessibility, product approval and building code education. Through an expertly managed consensus building process, the Commission has created an exemplary work product that is to be applied uniformly throughout the State. However, the uniform application of the Commission’s work product has yet to be achieved. There are significant disparities within the State in code enforcement, permitting requirements and associated fees that are detrimental to the aims and objectives articulated in the 1996 Building Study Commission Report and Governor Scott’s objectives to encourage the creation of construction in these most difficult economic times. With the Commission’s move to DBPR the Commission has an opportunity to initiate a discussion regarding the uniformity of the implementation of our statewide code. The Chair expressed that a good first step would be to convene a stakeholder workgroup to identify and evaluate key issues and possible agency solutions, as well as a possible strategies for implementing a more uniform interpretation and administration of the Code. The initial scope of the Building Code System Uniform Implementation Evaluation Workgroup will be to evaluate how well the Commission's efforts to create a unified building code have been implemented throughout the State. The Chair explained that his preference before appointing a workgroup on an issue of this importance is to determine whether the Commission concurs with the proposed strategy and supports convening a workgroup to evaluate the uniformity of the implementation of the Florida Building Code System. The Commission voted unanimously to convene the Building Code System Uniform Implementation Evaluation Workgroup at the January 31, 2012 Meeting. Following are the Workgroup appointments:

Workgroup Membership
Member	Affiliation
Dick Browdy (FBC Chair)	Florida Building Commission (FBC)
Tom Allen	Building Officials Central Florida (BOAF)
Steve Bassett	Florida Engineering Society (FES)
Rusty Carrol	Building Officials S.E. Florida (BOAF) and Broward County Board of Rules and Appeals (BORA)
Wayne Fernandez	General/Commercial Contractors
Jack Glenn	Florida Home Builders Association (FHBA)
Rick Logan	American Institute of Architects Florida Chapter (AIA Florida)
Danny Weeden	Building Officials N.W. Florida (BOAF)
Louie Wise	Mechanical Contractors and Subcontractors
Mark Zehnal	Florida Roofing and Sheet Metal Association (FRSA)

Workgroup Scope and Issue Referrals

Workgroup Scope

The scope of the Building Code System Uniform Implementation Evaluation Workgroup is as follows:

The initial scope of the Building Code System Uniform Implementation Evaluation Workgroup will be to evaluate how well the Commission's efforts to create a unified building code have been implemented throughout the State. The first step was to convene a stakeholder workgroup to identify and evaluate key issues and possible agency solutions, as well as possible strategies for implementing a more uniform interpretation and administration of the Florida Building Code.

The Florida Building Code System is Comprised of Five Essential Components

I. The Florida Building Code and the Code Development Process

II. The Florida Building Commission

III. Local Administration of the Code

IV. Strengthening Compliance and Enforcement

V. Product Evaluation and Approval

Building Code System Assessment Triennial Process Referrals

Recommendations referred to Workgroup for evaluation in rank order from the BSCA Process:

I. The Florida Building Code and the Code Development Process

· Interagency coordination workgroup between state regulatory agencies and local jurisdictions (I.)

· Workgroup to ensure that the ISO recognizes the FBC (I.)

· FBC I-Code participation evaluation (I.)

· Workgroup on non-binding opinions for FACBC (I.)

· Cross-reference table regarding state agency regulations (I.)

· Evaluate all exemptions/exceptions in the Code (I.)

II. The Florida Building Commission

None were offered.

III. Local Administration of the Code

· Seek legislative authority for the Commission to challenge local technical amendments (III.)

· With BOAF ensure code interpretations are consistent (III.)

· Require FBC approval of local technical amendments (III.)

IV. Strengthening Compliance and Enforcement

· AA program for building officials (IV.)

V. Product Evaluation and Approval

· Statewide requirement for how product approval documentation should be submitted to building departments (V.)

Workgroup Participation and Procedural Guidelines

Participants’ Role

ü The Committee process is an opportunity to explore possibilities. Offering or exploring an idea does not necessarily imply support for it.

ü Listen to understand. Seek a shared understanding even if you don’t agree.

ü Be focused and concise—balance participation & minimize repetition. Share the airtime.

ü Look to the facilitator to be recognized. Please raise your hand to speak.

ü Speak one person at a time. Please don’t interrupt each other.

ü Focus on issues, not personalities. “Using insult instead of argument is the sign of a small mind.”

ü Avoid stereotyping or personal attacks. “Mud thrown is ground lost.”

ü To the extent possible, offer options to address other’s concerns, as well as your own.

ü Participate fully in discussions, and complete session assignments as requested.

ü Refrain from using electronic devices during the meetings; your participation is needed.

ü Keep all electronic devices turned off, or in a silent mode.

Facilitators’ Role (Jeff A. Blair—FCRC Consensus Center at FSU)

ü Design, facilitate and report on a participatory Workgroup process.

ü Assist the participants to build understanding and consensus on action recommendations.

ü Provide process design and procedural guidance to participants.

ü Assist participants to stay focused and on task.

ü Assure that participants follow Meeting Participation Guidelines.

Guidelines for Brainstorming

ü Speak when recognized by the Facilitator.

ü Offer one idea per person without explanation.

ü No comments, criticism, or discussion of other's ideas.

ü Listen respectively to other's ideas and opinions.

ü Seek understanding and not agreement at this point in the discussion.

The Name Stacking Process

ü Determines the speaking order.

ü Participant raises hand to speak. Facilitator will call on participants in turn.

ü Facilitator may interrupt the stack (change the speaking order) in order to promote discussion on a specific issue or, to balance participation and allow those who have not spoken on an issue an opportunity to do so before others on the list who have already spoken on the issue.

Key Issues for Enhancing Uniformity of the Code

Summary of Key Issues

Following is a summary of key issues suggested as priority issues for Workgroup evaluation based on a synthesis of meeting participants’ comments:

I. Consistency in Submittal Requirements, Fees and Timeframes:

· Consistency in the baseline requirements for building permit application submittals, including the related forms and checklists used throughout the building permit application process, from submittal documents to requirements on the plans to plans review to issuance of building permits.

· Consistency in timeframes from submittal to receiving a building permit (across jurisdictions).

· Consistent fees for building permits, and requiring the use of building permit fees for building department functions and not for supporting other general revenue functions.

II. Consistency in Code Interpretations and Local Technical Amendments:

· Consistency in interpretation and enforcement of the Code based on the adopted Code, and not based on personal preference.

· Authority to interpret all components of the Florida Building Code.

· Elimination of local technical code amendments not adopted as a local technical amendment and submitted to the Commission as required.

III. Central Repository for Code Requirements and Interpretations:

· Create (or enhance the existing BSCIS database) a comprehensive central repository at the Commission level for answers and input on correctly interpreting and enforcing the Florida Building Code to assist BOs in making an educated decision (e.g., binding and non-binding opinions, code interpretations, declaratory statements, code amendments, etc.).

· Development of a FAQ regarding code interpretations for inclusion on the repository (website).

· Development of Best Practices Guidelines for code requirements and interpretations to assist with consistency. Include on the central repository.

IV. Education and Training on the Code:

· Education and training on the code, across licensure categories to ensure consistency.

Recommendation to the Florida Building Commission

Draft Recommendation to the Florida Building Commission:

(1) The Florida Building Commission developed the Florida Building Code to be implemented uniformly throughout the State with the exception of the HVHZ; (2) The Commission through its established processes continually addresses current relevant issues and model code updates; (3) The Florida Building Commission’s Building Code System Uniform Implementation Evaluation Workgroup has determined that there are significant disparities within the State in Code enforcement, permitting requirements and associated fees; (4) All regulatory agencies and licensees engaged in the process of implementing the Florida Building Code are required to implement the Florida Building Code and it's associated processes; (5) Local technical amendments should be eliminated, if at all possible, to achieve consistency and uniformity; and (6) the Commission should be granted additional legislative authority to implement processes and required forms to achieve the goal of uniform implementation while preserving on of the Code’s foundations of local administration and enforcement of the Code.

The Building Code System Uniform Implementation Evaluation Workgroup recommends the Florida Building Commission seek legislative authority sufficient to implement the goals described in the recommendations, and address issues evaluated during the Workgroup process summarized as:

I. Enhance Consistency in Submittal Requirements, Fees and Timeframes;

II. Enhance Consistency in Code Interpretations and Local Technical Amendments;

III. Develop/Enhance a Central Repository for Code Requirements & Interpretations; and,

IV. Enhance Education and Training on the Code.

	4=acceptable	3= minor reservations	2=major reservations	1= not acceptable
Ranking 04/08/13

Participants Comments and Reservations April 8, 2013):

Options Identified for Evaluation

I. The Florida Building Code

v a,) Evaluate all exemptions/exceptions in the Florida Building Code. {BCSA}

v b.) Convene an Interagency Coordination Workgroup between state regulatory agencies and local jurisdictions. {BCSA}

v c.) Convene a workgroup to ensure that ISO recognizes the FBC (equal to IBC). {BCSA}

v d.) Convene a process to determine whether the Commission should participate in the I-Code development process (FBC I-Code participation evaluation). {BCSA}

(Note: An ICC Participation Workgroup process was conducted by the Commission in 2004, and the Commission made a policy decision not to participate in the ICC, instead relying on BOAF participation)

v e.) Convene a Workgroup to determine whether to seek authority for non-binding opinions on the Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction (FACBC). {BCSA}

v f.) Seek legislative authority for the Commission to issue interpretations of the Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction (FACBC) consistent with the rest of the Code.

{Referral from Commission on 12/4/13} {FBC}

v g.) Develop a cross-reference table (crosswalk) regarding state agency regulations. {BCSA}

v h.) Evaluate whether the International Fire Code should be adopted as the basis for The Florida Fire Prevention Code, versus NFPA 101 because it is better integrated with the International Code family. If so, then send a recommendation to the Legislature for needed statutory changes. {Workgroup}

v i.) In Lieu of adopting the IFC, develop a comprehensive comparison chart that fully outlines the conflicts/differences between the FFPC and the FBC (not just for the changes in the current code cycle). {Workgroup}

Note: An additional option was proposed as follows:

“That all true Non-Florida specific changes to the Model codes be stricken in the next code cycle.”

This option was not included in the list since Florida law {Section 553.73 (7)(c)-(g), F.S.} already addresses the issue, and specifies the allowable exceptions.

II. The Florida Building Commission

There were options evaluated related to the Florida Building Commission during the Building Code System Assessment Triennial Process, however none achieved a consensus level of support.

III. Local Administration of the Code (Enforcement)

v a.) Seek legislative authority for the Commission to challenge local technical amendments. {BCSA}

v b.) Require FBC approval of local technical amendments (would require Commission approval prior to implementation at the local level). {BCSA}

v c.) Recommend that the Florida Legislature enact legislation prohibiting municipalities and counties from adopting local technical amendments by ordinance. {Workgroup}

v d.) Commission should work with BOAF to ensure code interpretations are consistent. {BCSA}

v e.) Develop a uniform building permit application form for use by all jurisdictions statewide (Consider a two-part form where “Part A” is consistent statewide, and “Part B” provides for additional information required by local jurisdictions.). {Workgroup}

v f.) Evaluate Building Inspector qualifications, and continuing education requirements. {Workgroup}

IV. Strengthening Compliance and Enforcement (Education)

v a.) Evaluate development of an AA program for building officials. {BCSA}

v b.) Evaluate development of a joint training process between building officials and construction industry licensees for licensure continuing education requirements (e.g., BOAF, AIA, FES, FHBA, ABC, FRSA, etc.). {Workgroup}

v c.) Evaluate the issue of FBC code books (bound volumes) not being available for use during DBPR licensure exams. {Referral from Commission on 10/9/12} {FBC}

V. Product Evaluation and Approval

v a.) Develop statewide requirement for how and what product approval documentation should be submitted to building departments. {BCSA}

A summary of the package of recommendations is included on page 5 of the Agenda Packet.

Referral Acronyms
BCSA	Building Code System Assessment project (2010-2012) referral
FBC	Florida Building Commission referral
Workgroup	Building Code System Uniform Implementation Evaluation Workgroup referral

Options Acceptability Ranking Process

Acceptability Ranking Exercise Overview

During the meeting members may be asked to review existing proposed options and invited to propose any additional project relevant options for Workgroup consideration. A preliminary list of options was proposed by members during Meeting I and II and other options were referred by the Commission from the Florida Building Code System Triennial Assessment Process conducted in 2010-2012. Following discussion and refinement of options, members may be asked to do rankings of proposed options. Members should be prepared to offer specific refinements to address their reservations.

Once ranked, options with a 75% or greater number of 4’s and 3’s in proportion to 2’s and 1’s shall be considered consensus recommendations. The Workgroup’s consensus recommendations will be submitted to the Commission for consideration.

The following scale will be utilized for rankings:

Acceptability Ranking Scale	4= Acceptable, I agree	3= Acceptable, I agree with minor reservations	2= Not Acceptable, I don’t agree unless major reservations addressed	1= Not Acceptable
Ranking 4/8/13

Key to Symbols
Symbol	Meaning of Symbol
Q	Proposed Option
©	Consensus Ranked Option

Criteria for Evaluating/Ranking Proposed Options
Effective Options are SMART
Criteria	Explanation
Specific	It is detailed enough so that anyone reading the Option will know what is intended to be accomplished.
Measurable	The end result can be identified in terms of quantity, quality, acceptable standards, etc. You know you have a measurable Option when it states in objective terms the end result or product.
Attainable	The Option is feasible. Are there resources available, or likely to become available for implementing the Option?
Relevant	The Option is relevant to the Commission’s mission, purpose and charge.
Time-Framed	There are milestones with a specific date attached to the completion.

Public Comment Form

The Florida Building Commission and the Building Code System Uniform Implementation Evaluation Workgroup encourage written comments—All written comments will be compiled and included in the meeting summary report.

Name:

Organization/Affiliation:

Meeting Date:

Please make your comment(s) as specific as possible, and offer suggestions to address your concerns.

Please limit comment(s) to topics within the scope of the Workgroup, and refrain from any personal attacks or derogatory language.

The Facilitator may, at his discretion, limit public comment to a maximum of three-minutes (3) per person, depending on the number of individuals wishing to speak.

Comment:

Please give completed form(s) to the Facilitator for inclusion in the meeting summary report.