FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION

BUILDING (STRUCTURAL) TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MINUTES

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 2014

9:30 A.M. -11:22 A.M.

 

TELECONFERENCE/WEBINAR MEETING

FROM TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA
Public point of access: Suite 90A, 1940 North Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida.

 

TAC/POC MEMBERS AND OBJECTIVES

STRUCTURAL TAC MEMBERS PRESENT: (ALL MEMBERS PRESENT) James Schock :Chair , CW Macomber, Steve Strawn, Craig Parrino, Daniel L. Lavrich, Do Y. Kim, Jack Glenn, Jamie Gascon, Warner Chang, Harry “Rusty” Carroll, David Compton

 

MEETING AGENDA

OBJECTIVE

REVIEW OF OBJECTIVES WILL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:  Description of issue, discussion by TAC, public comment, TAC action

9:30 A.M.

 

Welcome and Opening, Roll Call

Reviewed and Approved of April 9, 2014 Meeting Agenda with an update to the agenda to address the Declaratory statement items first.

Reviewed and Approved of the December 3, 2013 Meeting Minutes 

2)

To consider and discuss the following Declaratory Statements:

 

TAC Actions:

 

DS2014-023 by Glenn T. Williams, Esq., B.C.S. of Williams Law Firm 
Interpretation No.1

A.      Does the Storm Stoppers product as described fall within the scope of the Florida Building Code, Existing Building?

Answer: Answer is not possible.  No specific project/level of work was provided, and there are no specific facts and circumstances provided.

B.      If the answer is yes, then what are the specific Code provisions from the 2010 Florida Building Code, Existing Building, that apply?

Answer:  See answer to question A.

Interpretation No.2

A.     What are the specific statutes, Code provisions and laws that give the Florida Building Commission jurisdiction or legal authority to regulate or approve any product for use on an Existing Building AFTER the building has been constructed and received a certificate of occupancy, when such product is not used or incorporated into the permanent structure, nor attached with permanent anchors that penetrate into the structure of the building's frame?

Answer: Answer is not possible.  Question is too general.

B.     Are wood structural panels (i.e. plywood) as-described in the Florida Building Code, Residential, exempt from having to comply with Florida Statutes Section 553.842(5)?

Answer:  Answer is not possible.  This question does not apply to the Petitioner’s product.

C.     If, in the opinion of the Florida Building Commission, wood structural panels (i.e, plywood) are exempt from Florida Statutes Section 553.842 (5), then would Storm Stoppers be entitled to receive the same exempt treatment as wood structural panels assuming the Storm Stopper product is equal to if not better than wood structural panels, for the temporary or emergency protection of window or doors from wind and rain?

Answer: Answer is not possible.  This question does not apply to the Petitioner’s product; and there are no specific facts and circumstances provided.

D.     What is the Florida product approval number for wood structural panels (i.eplywood) showing that product was approved by the Florida Building Commission?

Answer: Answer is not possible.  This question does not apply to the Petitioner’s product.

E.     Since the Storm Stoppers product is equal to if not better than wood structural panels Identified in Section 1609.1.2 of the Florida Building Code, Residential, is Storm Stoppers entitled to receive the same treatment as wood structural panels and not apply for a product approval number?

Answer: Answer is not possible.  This question does not apply to the Petitioner’s product.

F.      Is Keddo Enterprises and Florida Building Commission recognized groups like the IHPA, FLASH, FEMA and the IBHS permitted to advertise or market wood structural panels (i.e. plywood) for "Wind-borne Debris Protection, " as a "Shutter" and for "Hurricane Protection" in Florida (even though plywood does not have a Florida product approvanumber)?

Answer: Answer is not possible.  This question does not apply to the Petitioner’s product.

 

G.    Is the Florida Building Commission violating Section 553.842(5) in their promotion of Table 1609.1.2 in the Florida Building Code, Residentialby advertising wood structural panels (i.e. plywood) as "Wind-Borne Debris Protection(at a time when plywood does not have a Florida product approval numbeand has not been shown to pass the ASTM Large Missile Impact Test and the Cyclic Pressure Differential Tests)?

Answer: Answer is not possible.  This question does not apply to the Petitioner’s product.

 

H.    Can Keddo Enterprises, Including home improvement stores, advertisesell, offer, market or distribute plywood for wind-borne debris protection or hurricane protection, since plywood is actually sold by home improvement stores throughout Florida for that purpose both long before and during an approaching, hurricane?

Answer: Answer is not possible.  This question does not apply to the Petitioner’s product, and  it is not allowed to comment on the conduct of another in a declaratory statement petition.

I.       Additionally, major home improvement stores advertise or sell plywood in Florida as a Shutterhurricane protection or as protection from wind-borne debris both long before and as a hurricane is approaching. For example, the home improvement chain Lowe's has a YouTube video showing how to board up windows with plywood (which consumers can purchase from Lowe's). See video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jCUrYY3lEk&feature=share&list=PLA3F904701785FEB8

Can Keddo Enterprises create a similar video advertising or marketing plywood as a "shutter," "hurricane protection" or as "protection from wind-borne debris", without violating Florida Statutes Section 553.842(5)?

Answer:  Answer is not possible.  This question does not apply to the Petitioner’s product, and it is not allowed to comment on the conduct of another in a declaratory statement petition.

Interpretation 3:

Does the Storm Stoppers product fall outside the scope of Rule 61G20-3.001, State Product

Approval Program?

Answer: The answer is “Yes”.  The product in question is a proposed alternative to the Wood Structural Panels (prescriptive specification method for protection of opening) as specified in Section R 301.2.1.2, Exception, of the Florida Building Code “FBC”, Residential.   As per Section 104.11 of the Florida Building Code, Building, an alternative method of construction to that prescribed in the FBC is subject to review and approval by the local building official, when such alternative is substantiated to be equivalent of that prescribed in the FBC in quality, strength, effectiveness, durability and safety.  Therefore, the Florida Building Commission has no authority to approve said alternate as part of the State Product Approval Program.

 

DS2014-035 by Scott E. Rudacille, Esq. of Blalock Walters, P.A. 
Question 1: Does a voluntary alteration project to a pre-FIRM single-family residential structure involving removal of more than 30% of the truss system in order to create a tray or vaulted ceiling constitute Substantial Structural Damage pursuant to FBC Existing Building Section 202, or is it reviewed as a structural alteration under FBC Existing Building Section 807.4?”,

Answer: The project would not be classified as “Substantial Structural Damage” and would be reviewed under 807.4.

 

Question 2:  If an alteration project is deemed to be Substantial Structural Damage under FBC Existing Building Section 202, is it automatically deemed to also be Substantial Damage for flood design requirements, regardless of whether the project meets the definitions of Substantial Damage and Substantial Improvement in FBC Section1612.2 (ie. The “50% Rule”)?

Answer:  The answer is no.  Regardless of the impact to the roof system, flood design requirements for new construction are only triggered if the project exceeds the “50% Rule”, as described in the definition of Substantial Damage and Substantial Improvement in FBC Section 1612.2.

DS2014-037 by Wayne R. Thorne, Building Official of Longboat Key Building Department 

Question 1:

To the question” As it relates to noncompliant flood elevation buildings, is it the intent of the Florida Building Code, Building Section 3109.1.1 exception to prevent any repairs and require the building to become compliant by elevating them on new foundations, relocating the building, or rebuild the buildings at the minimum required elevation?”,  the answer is not possible.  This question is general and falls outside the scope of the declaratory statement process.

Question 2:

To the question” As it relates to the definitions of repair, would sealing of fractures and fissures be considered a repair or modification?”, the answer is repair.  The work in question is considered patching/restoration of building elements for the purpose of maintaining such elements in good condition and thus falls within the scope of “Repair” as defined in Section 202 of the Florida Building Code, Existing Building.

Question 3:

To the question” As it relates to the definitions of repair, would cleaning of corroded                                                         reinforcements and applying concrete patching or filling the spalled areas be considered a repair or modification?,  ?”, the answer is repair.  The work in question is considered patching/restoration of building elements for the purpose of maintaining such elements in good condition and thus falls within the scope of “Repair” as defined in Section 202 of the Florida Building Code, Existing Building.

Question 4:

To the question” As it relates to the definitions of repair, would replacement of reinforcements or ties, or realignment of sprung reinforcements, be considered repair or modification?,  the answer is repair.  The work in question is considered patching/restoration of building elements for the purpose of maintaining such elements in good condition and thus falls within the scope of “Repair” as defined in Section 202 of the Florida Building Code, Existing Building.

 

Question 5:

Would Florida Building Code, Building Section 3109.1.1 exception have the same requirements if the building was built as compliant with a pile foundation and for the flood elevation? ”, Answer is not possible.  This question falls outside the scope of the project in question.

3)

To accepted interim reports on the following research projects

1)      Investigation of fastening of wood structural panels for opening protection

Dr. Forrest Masters presented the findings on their research of structural panels and provided a report of their findings.  The Structural TAC voted unanimously to approve this report provided by Dr. Forrest Masters

2)     Full scale wind load testing of aluminum screen enclosures

Dr. Forrest Masters presented the findings of wind load testing of aluminum screen enclosures.  The Structural TAC voted unanimously to approve this report provided by Dr. Forrest Masters

3)     Feasibility study for in-home storm shelters in Florida residential homes. 

Dr. David Prevatt provided the University of Florida findings on in-home storm shelters to the committee.  The Structural TAC voted unanimously to approve this report provided by Dr. David Prevatt

 

 

4)

No other business

5)

Adjourned at 11:22

 STAFF CONTACTS: Joe Bigelow, Planning Analyst joe.bigelow@myfloridalicense.com

 (850) 717-1829 or Mo Madani, Manager mo.madani@myfloridalicense.com

Teleconference Process and Etiquette URL:

Note: This document is available to any person requiring materials in alternate format upon request.  Contact the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Suite 90, 1940 N. Monroe, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 or call 850-487-1824.