FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION

WELCOME

Chairman Rodriguez welcomed the Commission and gallery to the May 2007 plenary session of the Florida Building Commission. He directed the Commission to Mr. Blair for a review of the Commission meeting agenda.

REVIEW AND APPROVE AGENDA

Mr. Blair conducted a review of the meeting agenda as presented in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the meeting agenda. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

REVIEW AND APPROVE MARCH 27 & 28, 2007 MEETING MINUTES AND FACILITATOR’S REPORTS

Chairman Rodriguez called for approval of the minutes and the facilitator’s reports from the March 2007 Commission meeting.

Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the March Commission meeting minutes. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

CONSIDER ACCESSIBILITY WAIVER APPLICATIONS

Chairman Rodriguez directed the Commission to Neil Mellick for consideration of the Accessibility Waiver Applications as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

#3 Soho Beach House

Mr. Mellick stated the applicant had requested the application be deferred prior to hearing the case.

No Commission action required.

#1 Gables CitiTower

Mr. Mellick described the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was presented in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the Council recommended granting the waiver.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the Council’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

#2 Southpointe Park

Mr. Mellick explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the Council recommended approval of the waiver.

Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the Council’s recommendation.

Mr. Mellick added the Council would also like the order to state the applicant will not be exempt from the provisions of Title 2 of the ADA.

Commissioner Browdy restated his motion for approval of the Council’s recommendation as amended. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

#4 Academy for International Studies

Mr. Mellick explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the Council recommended granting the waiver but would require the order to state the applicant will not be exempt from Title 2 of the ADA.

Commissioner Gross moved approval of the Council’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

#5 Sessums, Mason, Blach & Caballero

Mr. Mellick explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the Council recommended approval of the waiver.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the Council’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion Council’s recommendation was unanimous. Motion carried.

#6 The Mercato

Mr. Mellick explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the Council’s recommendation was for deferral requesting the applicant provide detailed plans of the building.

Commissioner Vann stated he would be abstaining from vote due to conflict of interest.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the Council’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried. (Commissioner Vann abstained.)

#7 Bob Wilson Dodge Storage Garage

Mr. Mellick explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the Council’s recommendation was for denial due to lack of hardship.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the Council’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion resulted in 17 in favor and 1 opposed (Commissioner Browdy). Motion carried.

CONSIDER APPLICATIONS FOR PRODUCT AND ENTITY APPROVAL

Chairman Rodriguez directed the Commission to Commissioner Carson for presentation of entity approvals.

Commissioner Carson presented the POC recommendations for entity approval in the form of a motion as follows:

TST 4120 Architectural Testing Inc.

A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

TST 4744 National Certified Testing Laboratories

A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Mr. Blair then presented the products for approval as they appeared in the matrix provided to each Commissioner. Recommended approvals were presented in consent agenda format with conditional approvals, deferrals, and denials being considered individually. (See Florida Building Commission Product Approval Applications)

Certification Method

Recommended for Approval

Product #’s: 42-R4; 43-R4; 44-R4; 45-R4; 239-R8; 251-R6; 253-R5; 2646-R3; 3663-R4; 4062-R3; 4328-R3; 4708-R3; 5047-R1; 6074-R1; 6431-R1; 6502-R1; 6571; 6684-R1; 6688-R1; 6694-R1; 7130; 7397; 7776; 8327; 8397; 8532; 8533; 8542; 8544; 8548; 8573; 8576; 8583; 8590; 8602; 8603; 8605; 8619; 8636; 8638; 8641; 8642; 8643; 8649; 8670; 8678; 8679; 8696; 8697; 8700; 8704; 8705; 8710; 8714; 8715; 8716; 8717; 8718; 8720; 8740; 8745; 8750; 8752; 8754; 8755; 8756; 8759; 8760; 8761; 8766; 8767; 8769; 8773; 8774; 8776; 8777; 8778; 8779; 8781.

Commissioner Carson moved approval for the consent agenda. Commissioner Wiggins entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Recommended for Conditional Approval

2691-R1 and 2699-R1 Windoworld Industries Inc.

Mr. Blair stated these products were recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to indicate in limits of use for HVHZ only white PVC is certified; deferred from March 2007 - complied with: Remove unsigned draft notice for plastic requirements by Miami Dade and use the proper AAMA certification for Rayhau testing; remove certification for FER requirements, as this is a fixed window; and provide proper and final certification on laminate.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Kim entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

2701-R1 Windoworld Industries, Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to indicate in limits of use for HVHZ only white PVC is certified; deferred from March 2007 - complied with: Remove unsigned draft notice for plastic requirements by Miami Dade and use the proper AAMA certification for Rayhau testing; remove certification for FER requirements, as this is a fixed window; and provide proper and final certification on laminate.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Kim entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

2988 Industrial Millwork Corp.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the Certification agency needs to verify compliance with 2004 FBC; model/number or name is not the same as in NOA; installation instructions are different from the Certification Agency Certificate.

Commissioner Kim moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

4334-R2; 5508-R1; 7351-R1; 8228-R1; 8692 Masonite International

Mr. Blair stated these products were recommended for conditional approval stating there is no rational analysis on application; FL PE to validate application.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Kim entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

7833-R1 Vi Win Tech

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the standard years on Certification for ASTM E1886/1996 are not the same as on the application; standard year for ASTM E1996 given on Certification is not FBC adopted; applicant, Vi Win Tech, does not appear as listed under the AAMA Certified Profile Licensees (uploaded under Certification Agency Certificate); for product 7833.3, there is no Certification Agency Certificate uploaded; and could not verify Limits of Use.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Kim entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

7880-R1 Vi Win Tech

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the standard years on Certification for ASTM E1886/1996 are not the same as on the application; standard year for ASTM E1996 given on Certification is not FBC adopted; applicant, Vi Win Tech, does not appear as listed under the AAMA Certified Profile Licensees (uploaded under Certification Agency Certificate); for Product 7880.1; and design pressure is exceeded under Installation Instructions.

Commissioner Kim moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

7882-R1 Vi Win Tech

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the standard years on Certification for ASTM E1886/1996 are not the same as on the application; standard year for ASTM E1996 given on Certification is not FBC adopted; applicant, Vi Win Tech, does not appear as listed under the AAMA Certified Profile Licensees (uploaded under Certification Agency Certificate); for Products 7882.2, .4 and .5; and design pressures are exceeded under Installation Instructions.

Commissioner Kim moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8359 General Aluminum Company

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating for products 8359.8, .9, .10 and .11, unable to verify design pressures.

Commissioner Kim moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8546 Gorell Enterprises Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating use on application same testing standards as on certification.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Kim entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8571 Therma Tru Corporation

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to provide hardware schedule as tested.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8580- Extech Exterior Technologies

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating "Miami-Dade NOA is not a standard and needs to be removed; indicate testing standards on application.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8626 Long’s Millwork Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to indicate hardware as tested; and standard years given on Application are not FBC adopted.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion.

Commissioner Kidwell stated he would be abstaining from this vote.

Commissioner Kidwell abstaining - Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8736 Energy Saving Products of Florida

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the negative pressures above tested are not certified by certification agency.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8738 Energy Saving Products of Florida

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the certification agency on application indicated they are not certifying these products; select the correct certification agency.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8741 Majestic Entry Doors

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to specify hardware as tested.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8742 M W Manufacturers Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating for Product 8742.4, there is no verifiable evidence of structural load testing required by FBC (AAMA or equivalent).

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8748 M W Manufacturers Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the certificate shows Standard ANSI/AAMA/NWWDA 101/I.S.2-97 testing, but the application shows AAMA/WDMA/CSA 101/I.S./2A440-05, which is not on the Certificate.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8751 Gorell Enterprises Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the standard year is not FBC adopted.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8768 and 8770 Curries

Mr. Blair stated these products were recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to specify mullion as tested on an assembly, indicate an approved mullion or remove the reference to the mullion and indicate connection to substrate; indicate max. D.L.O.; provide certification of polycarbonate; air limitation for louvered doors has not been indicated; door skin material has not been indicated; material, dimensions and thickness of wire anchors has not been indicated; max shim space is not indicated; source of 3/8" expansion anchor and capacity, edge distance and substrate strength is not indicated; capacity of lag screw with 2.5" penetration is exceeded; indicate source of capacity for #8 X 1" drywall screw into wood or steel stud; the stud thickness for bearing is not known.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Recommended for Deferral

7881-R1 Vi Win Tech

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating the standard years on Certification for ASTM E1886/1996 are not the same as on the application; Standard Year for ASTM E1996 given on Certification is not FBC adopted; Applicant, Vi Win Tech, does not appear as listed under the AAMA Certified Profile Licensees (uploaded under Certification Agency Certificate); For Product 7881.4, Model/Number is not the same as on NAMI Certification.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8204-R1 Vi Win Tech

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating the edition year of the Standards listed on Certification for ASTM E1886/1996 are not the same as on the application; Standard Year for ASTM E1996 given on Certification is not FBC adopted; Standards ASTM E1886/1996 and TAS 201/202/203 are missing on the Application Standards list; Applicant, Vi Win Tech, does not appear as listed under the AAMA Certified Profile Licensees (uploaded under Certification Agency Certificate); For Products 8204.1, .2 and .3, there are no NAMI Certificates uploaded; For Products 8204.2 and .3; and Design Pressures are exceeded, as per Installation Instructions.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8206-R1 Vi Win Tech

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating the Standard Years on Certification for ASTM E1886/1996 are not the same as on tha application; Standard Year for ASTM E1996 given on Certification is not FBC adopted; Standards ASTM E1886/1996 and TAS 201/202/203 are missing on the Application Standards list; Applicant, Vi Win Tech, does not appear as listed under the AAMA Certified Profile Licensees (uploaded under Certification Agency Certificate); For Products 8204.2, .3 and .4, there are no NAMI Certificates uploaded; For Products 8204.3 and .4; and Design Pressures are exceeded, as per Installation Instructions.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8772 Englert Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating the Standard years are not FBC adopted; Application shall be made by the manufacturer holding the NOA; and Installation instructions are beyond certification.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8780 Vi Win Tech

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating the Standard Years on Certification for ASTM E1886/1996 are not the same as on the application; Standard Year for ASTM E1996 given on Certification is not FBC adopted; Applicant, Vi Win Tech, does not appear as listed under the AAMA Certified Profile Licensees (uploaded under Certification Agency Certificate); For All Products, there are no NAMI Certificates uploaded; For Products 8780.2 and .3; and Design Pressures are exceeded, as per Installation Instructions.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8782 Vi Win Tech

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating the applicant, Vi Win Tech, does not appear as listed under the AAMA Certified Profile Licensees (uploaded under Certification Agency Certificate); For All Products, there are no NAMI Certificates uploaded; and For Products 8782.2, and .3, Design Pressures are exceeded, as per Installation Instructions.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Incomplete Applications

4509 Dome’L Inc – Incomplete.

8308 E-Z Taping Systems, Inc. – Withdrawn by the applicant.

8593 Martin Door Manufacturing – Incomplete.

8775 Jeld-Wen – Incomplete.

No Commission action necessary.

Evaluation by Architect or Engineer

Recommended for Approval

Product #’s: 1800-R2; 3915-R2; 4210; 5684-R1; 6218-R6; 6356-R1; 7484; 8124; 8125-R1; 8391; 8392; 8393; 8406; 8407; 8408; 8413; 8415; 8472-R1; 8534; 8535; 8543; 8551; 8554; 8556; 8557; 8558; 8559;8560; 8614; 8618; 8621; 8627; 8630; 8631; 8645; 8646; 8667; 8675; 8676; 8683; 8684; 8686; 8687; 8688; 8702; 8706; 8713; 8723; 8725; 8727; 8728; 8739; 8747; 8763; 8765.

Commissioner Carson moved approval for the consent agenda. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Recommended for Conditional Approval

7179 Gorell Enterprises Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating both products seem to be the same and the applicant should remove one; for product 7179.2, Installation Instructions are for Series 5301, application Model/Number is 98115 Hurricane Mull.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8414 Thompson Construction and Remodeling

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the Quality Assurance Entity chosen indicated that the applicant is not under their inspection program requiring a certificate from an approved quality assurance entity.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8562 Eagle Window and Door Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to specify hardware as tested; Remove all the optional or as equal on hardware; Missing from Standards List: TAS 201/202/203 and ASTM E330/1886/1996. They are in the Evaluation Reports.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8564 Eagle Window and Door Inc. and 8569 Elegante Iron, Inc.

Mr. Blair stated these products were recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to provide hardware as tested.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8612 Nana Wall Systems, Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the Evaluation report refers to Comparative Analysis. Applicant must explain how it was analyzed testing a single size with a single load pressure.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8622 USA Shutter Company LLC

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating unlimited height and width is not acceptable. Tec and lag screws are not designed to be removed and re-installed (capacity is reduced).

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8629 Metalforming Inc; 8644 Lynn Metal Company Inc.; 8651 Armored Metal Works; 8652 Cheesboro Roofing; 8653 Comfort Enclosures; 8654 Crowther Roofing and Sheet Metal; 8655 Florida Southern Roofing; 8657 Metal Building Supplies, LLC; 8658 Mid Florida Metal Roofing and Supply, Inc.; 8660 Mullets Aluminum; 8661 Prestige Aluminum; 8662 Roofmetix Industries; 8664 SunSky Metal, LLC; 8665 Triad Corrugated Metals; 8690 Coastal Metal Roofing, Inc.; 8694 Architectural Metal Fabrication/Gutter Drain; 8695 ASI Building Products; and 8709 Roofmetix Industries.

Mr. Blair stated these products were recommended for conditional approval stating the applicants need to verify the fastening pattern used in TAS 100 matches pattern for corners and limit load as tested on TAS 100; Verify that TAS 125 test was conducted without a self-adhered underlayment bonded to the plywood.

Jaime Gascon, Miami-Dade Office of Building Code Compliance

Mr. Gascon stated he would like to add another condition to the products TAS125 which were tested stating if the underlayment that was used on the tests was the self-adhered underlayment bonded to the plywood, the panels are not to be used in a HVHZ.

Ted Berman

Mr. Berman stated Mr. Gascon’s condition should not be just for HVHZ, but should be applied for the whole state. He explained if the underlayment used can seal the deck the test is not valid.

Mr. Blair asked for clarification concerning meeting TAS125, if the underlayment is self-adhesive and bonds to the plywood the panels cannot be used at all. He asked Mr. Berman if he was satisfied with that additional condition.

Mr. Berman stated he was satisfied.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8637 StormWatch

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the signed and sealed hardcopy of evaluation report is missing.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8639 and 8685 Guardian Building Products – Ashley Aluminum, LLC.

Mr. Blair stated these products were recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to indicate on limits of use on application: "For flat screen roof only".

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8648 Elite Aluminum Corporation

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to indicate grade and thickness of aluminum components.; indicate hardware as tested; and verify glazing detail as tested.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8650 Folding Shutter Corporation

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to remove storm bar and mullions span larger than tested for impact/cycling.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8707 Best Rolling Doors, Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to remove sizes larger than tested or indicate not for HVHZ.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8711 RGM Products, Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to comply with HVHZ requirements of accelerated weathering and TAS 114 Appendix A, F, G, I, K or indicate "Not for HVHZ".

Commissioner Kim stated he would be abstaining from the vote.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried. (Commissioner Kim abstained.)

8712 YKK AP America

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating TAS 201/203 were missing on the Standard List. The applicant needs to provide the name and accreditation of testing lab performing the tests on the gaskets for 8712.3

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8722 Milliken Distribution

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to provide thickness of build-out channels.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8731 YKK AP America

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating there is no evidence of the location of the gasket testing.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8735 Acurlite Structural Skylights, Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to note 7 on drawing is not acceptable. If only a 4' X 8' size was tested all other shapes do not qualify for HVHZ. Verify a factor of safety of 2 was used for pressure and uplift. Otherwise indicate "Not for HVHZ".

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8753 YKK AP America

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the design is based on rational analysis when the building code indicates specific testing standards on the product.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Incomplete Applications

Product #’s: 4690-R1; 4990-R1; 8061; 8237; 8349; 8567; 8615; 8693; and 8724.

No Commission action necessary.

Evaluation by Test Report

Recommended for Approval

Product #’s: 5259-R2; 5792-R1; 6391-R2; 6809; 8289; 8588; 8672; 8677; 8729.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the consent agenda. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Recommended for Conditional Approval

3227-R5 Wayne-Dalton Corp.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to provide specification of fabric material and provide porosity of shutter system.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8193; 8198; and 8201 VEKA, Inc.

Mr. Blair stated these products were recommended for conditional approval stating the test reports are not signed and sealed by a FL PE. There is no certification of extrusion or laminate. Load test were of a different glass configuration than the impact test. The laminate glass description does not indicate the components. The installation instructions do not indicate spacing.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8356 EFCO Corporation

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the installation instructions indicate anchors other than tested. There is no certification of laminate. Test report is not signed and sealed by FL PE.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8625 Armaclad, Inc.

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the applicant needs to indicate hardware as tested. Provide testing of foam as required on Chapter 26. Installation instructions indicate glazing. Remove. Resolve conflict between test report and installation instructions related to air and water requirements.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8647 Elite Aluminum Corporation

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating ASTM E72 is not an adopted standard in the 2004 FBC. Installation instructions are not as tested. Some of the test reports are not signed and sealed by FL PE. Others have pages that are illegible.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8656 Tognana USA/Tognana Industrie E Fornaci

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating the tiles are missing call-out for identification on tile. Products 8656.1, .3 and .4 are missing the calculation data for the Aerodynamic Multiplier and Restoring Momets. This is required for moment-based systems. Otherwise indicate "Not for HVHZ".

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

8682 YKK AP America

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating there is no evidence of the testing location for the gasket. 8682.1 and .2 were not tested for air or water infiltration. Mull was not impacted.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Incomplete Applications

4999-R1 – Incomplete

8279 –Withdrawn by applicant

No Commission action necessary.

Evaluation by Entity

Recommended for Approval

Product # 8596

Commissioner Carson moved approval. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Recommended for Conditional Approval

8547 LP

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval stating there is no Certificate of Independence. AC321 is not an FBC approved Standard. Under Equivalence of Product Standards, “FL8547 RO Equiv ac321.pdf” does not load. Evaluation report contains rational analysis. Validation has to be by FL PE.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner D’Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Recommended for Deferral

8555 Protecto Wrap Company

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for deferral stating there is no Certificate of Independence. ASTM 2112 is not FBC adopted. ASTM E331-90 Year is not FBC adopted. Application does not indicate structural load testing standard. Could not download Certificate of Product Standards. R I Ogawa & Associates, Inc. is not FBC approved as a Product Validation Entity. Could not download Evaluation Reports. Could not download Installation Instructions. There is no verifiable evidence of Impact Resistance.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

CONSIDER LEGAL ISSUES AND PETITIONS FOR DECLARATORY STATEMENT:

BINDING INTERPRETATIONS:

DECLARATORY STATEMENTS:

Binding Interpretations:

Mr. Richmond stated there were no additional binding interpretations since the last meeting.

Declaratory Statements:

Supplemental Hearings:

DCA07-DEC011 by Billy Tyson, CBO, of Clemmons, Rutherford & Associates

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Chairman Rodriguez asked Commissioner Hamrick if DOE concurred with the committee’s recommendation.

Commissioner Hamrick responded DOE did concur.

Commissioner Kidwell moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Second Hearings:

DCA06-DEC-299 by Grant Tolbert of Hernando County Development Services

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-016 by James M. Nicholas, Esquire, Townhomes of Suntree

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-020 by Ed Riley, Fire Code Official, Collier County

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Greiner asked if it was to be assumed all work will be commercial work, because the case would be different if the work is residential.

Mr. Richmond stated the request was related to a commercial project.

Commissioner Greiner asked if the motion needs to clarify commercial work only.

Mr. Richmond stated an additional paragraph could be added with a general statement indicating the project was commercial.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the committee’s recommendation as amended with the additional language. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-034 by Don Blalock, President, Quickbrick USA, LLC

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Parrino referenced page 2, paragraph 5, 2^nd sentence stating it was implied the product would have to be approved under Rule 9B-72. He stated it was not the case, as it could also be qualified under jurisdictional approval.

Mr. Richmond asked for clarification concerning whether reference was made concerning the last sentence.

Commissioner Parrino stated it reads “use in Florida would be contingent upon its approval pursuant to Rule 9B-72.090.” He explained it may cause confusion implying it must have state approval under 9B-72. He recommended that sentence be stricken.

Mr. Richmond asked if it would be acceptable to Commissioner Parrino to just add “contingent upon its approval by the applicable local authorities having jurisdiction or pursuant to Rule 9B-72”.

Commissioner Parrino answered yes.

Commissioner Gross moved approval of the committee’s recommendation as amended. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-038 by Ed Riley, Fire Code Official, Collier County

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

First Hearings:

DCA07-DEC-017 by Robert S. Fine, TRG-Block One LTD

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Robert Fine, Attorney, Miami

Mr. Fine stated he attended the last Commission meeting requesting the declaratory statement. He continued stating the Commission had requested more information, specifically drawings of the project, to offer a more clear understanding of the petitioner’s request. He then stated while working on the amended petition, some of the issues raised by individuals in Miami-Dade County were considered. Mr. Fine noted some of the language of the petition had been changed. He explained the amended petition seeks a declaratory statement which states the requirements set forth in 1519.16 do not apply to balconies and parking garage decks, when such balconies and decks 1) are not part of the top surface of the building and 2) are not the weather exposed surface immediately above habitable space. He stated the petitioner sought the declaratory statement after meetings with Miami-Dade Code Compliance regarding local waterproofing guidelines which had been issued. He further stated staff in that office had stated their opinion this provision did apply to all balconies and parking garage decks. He continued stating his client has a lot at stake building very large buildings and felt it would be important to bring this to the Commission.

Mr. Fine then addressed another issue which had been raised which was the inappropriateness to be before the Commission with a declaratory statement which should have been dealt with by the local boards. He explained legal counsel had clarified it was appropriate to be petitioning for a declaratory statement. He asked why say 1519.16 does not apply to balconies and parking garage decks that are not part of the top surface of the building. He explained the way this provision, which is essentially a roofing standard, was written for roofs with slopes less than 2 and 12. He stated the issue was when building a high-rise building if a roof would be necessary over each balcony and on parking garage decks that were not at the top. He continued by stating this provision states “you have a minimum slope of ¼ inch per foot.” He stated that slope is not appropriate for balconies. Mr. Fine explained if there was a five foot deep balcony, it would require tapering of 1 ¼ inches. He further explained an eight foot slab would require an additional inch to the overall slab which would carry throughout the whole building creating a significant impact on the cost of the structure. He added the waterproofing itself would be at a cost of $3.00-$7.00 per foot.

Mr. Fine continued by stating Chapter 11 of the Florida Building Code, as well as ADA guidelines allow for a maximum slope of 1 and 50 at door maneuvering areas which typically extend as much as five feet from the door. He stated accessible parking spaces on access aisles located in parking garage decks are also limited to a maximum slope of 1 and 50. He restated the provision in question states in new construction the minimum deck slope shall be ¼ inch per foot. He noted ¼ inch per foot is greater than 1 in 50. He stated having a code that states 1 in 48 applies to these areas would violate the ADA, Chapter 11 and the Fair Housing Act, as well, if applied to balconies and garage decks. He then stated 553.502 states all state laws, rules, standards, and codes governing facilities covered by the guidelines shall be maintained to assure certification of the state’s construction standards and codes. He noted this is the certification of the Accessibility Code with the Federal ADA. Mr. Fine further stated if this were applied to a hotel, which is covered by the ADA as opposed to an apartment building, the provision in the parking garage and balconies would violate that and potentially go outside the bounds of the certification. He stated similar provisions would violate the Fair Housing Act. He stated the provision is located in Chapter 15, Roofs, of the Florida Building Code. He further stated Chapter 1519 is titled HVHZ Roof Coverings with slopes less than 2 and 12. He noted the roof covering is designed to reference the building’s top surface.

Mr. Fine then referenced and read an affidavit from South Florida structural engineer, Mark Mosbot. The affidavit was entered into the record at the TAC meeting May 7, 2007.

Chairman Rodriguez asked if Mr. Fine agreed with the committee’s recommendation.

Mr. Fine responded he did agree with their recommendation.

Chairman Rodriguez asked if there was any need to continue with presentation from Mr. Fine.

Mr. Fine stated he did not know if he were going to have any opposition.

Mr. Blair explained to Mr. Fine he had the right to continue, but if the motion was to approve the committee’s recommendation, which was the answer Mr. Fine was seeking, the discussion could be completed. He offered if the motion was not for approval, Mr. Fine would have more time to present his case.

Mr. Fine concurred.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion resulted in 17 in favor, 1 opposed (Gonzalez). Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-047 by John Leedy, PE, Leedy Electric Corporation

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files. He explained relative to the second question of the declaratory statement, he did not believe the Commission has the authority to answer the question if it is determined that Chapter 471 of the Florida Statutes supersedes the Building Code.

Commissioner Greiner suggested perhaps the Commission should answer the second question first in order to alleviate the counsel’s concerns.

A motion was made to approve the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-048 by Joseph W. Broughton, PE, Burgess Engineering, Inc.

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-049 by Penny Hoxie, PolyVulc USA, Inc.

Mr. Richmond stated this petition is beyond the scope of the Commission’s authority and will be dismissed.

DCA07-DEC-050 by Alfonso E. Oveido-Reyes, Hunker Down Systems

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

A motion was made to approve the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-060 by Emil Veksenfeld, PE

Mr. Richmond explained this petition will be deferred to allow the petitioner to provide more specific facts and circumstances.

DCA07-DEC-065 by Andrew Johnston, Harbor Home Improvements

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner D’Andrea moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-067 by Joseph R. Hetzel. PE, DASMA

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Kidwell moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-072 by Nelson de Leon, A1A

Mr. Richmond stated the petition had been withdrawn.

No Commission action necessary.

DCA07-DEC-078 by Siegried W. Valentin, AAMA

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for

declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Kidwell moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

DCA07-DEC-079 by Keith A Mahaffey, President, Keith Mahaffey Pools, Inc.

Mr. Richmond stated the petition is relative to an issue best considered by a local appeals board and is not appropriate for a declaratory statement. He continued stating the petition will be dismissed with no action required by the Commission.

DCA07-DEC-080 by Mike Pella, PE, Kamm Consulting, Inc.

Mr. Richmond explained the issues presented in the petition for declaratory statement and the committee’s recommendations as they appeared in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Kim moved approval of the committee’s recommendation. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

RECESS UNTIL WEDNESDAY

Wednesday, May 9, 2007

The meeting of the Florida Building Commission was called to order by Acting Chairman Richard Browdy at 8:32 a.m. on Wednesday, May 9, 2007, at the Embassy Suites Hotel, Tampa, Florida.

CHAIR’S DISCUSSION ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Chairman Rodriguez stated before the February Commission meeting, the Governor’s appointment director, Melanie Dimuzio, had been contacted on January 25, 2007, regarding the status of Commission appointments. He explained Ms. Dimuzio stated the Commissioners whose terms had expired would continue to serve until appointments were made. He noted at that time, Ms. Dimuzio had estimated appointments would be made prior to the March 26^th -28^th Commission meeting. He stated no report was available for the March Commission meeting. He then stated he had attempted to contact Ms. Dimuzio April 26^th but was not successful. He reported he had since sent an email to Ms. Dimuzio respectfully requesting the new appointments be delayed until August, because the Commission is in the middle of a Code update process. He noted bringing new Commissioners up to speed would prove a task before the Code update ends in August. Chairman Rodriguez stated he had nothing additional to report on the Commission appointments at this time and would assume no Commission appointments would be made prior to August.

Chairman Rodriguez then addressed the TAC/Workgroup appointments. He stated Peggy Greenwell was appointed to the Accessibility TAC. He then stated Jim Croce had been appointed to the Special Occupancy TAC. He thanked both individuals for agreeing to serve on those TACs. Chairman Rodriguez continued stating Kenneth Everett will be replacing Mark Zehnal on the Roofing TAC. He thanked Mr. Everett for agreeing to serve and recognized Mr. Zehnal for his service.

Chairman Rodriguez next addressed the Windows Workgroup. He stated there had been some water infiltration and related issues identified by the Hurricane Research Advisory Committee and the Windows Labeling Workgroup. He further stated he was revising the scope of the Window Labeling Workgroup to work on these issues. Chairman Rodriguez explained the Workgroup is being renamed as the Windows Workgroup, allowing a wider scope. He stated the Windows Workgroup would be comprised of all the Window Labeling Workgroup members plus the addition of Joe Belcher. He stated C.W. McComber had agreed to remain on the Windows Workgroup in his new role, representing the wood industry. He listed the members of the Windows Workgroup: Robert Amoruso, Chuck Anderson, Joe Belcher, Bob Boyer, Rusty Carol, Jamie Gaskins, Dale Greiner, John Hill, C.W. McComber, John McFee, Dave Olmstead, Craig Parrino, Roger Sanders, Jim Shock, Steve Strong, Ziggy Valentine and Dwight Wilkes. He thanked all members of the Windows Workgroup for agreeing to serve on the committee.

Chairman Rodriguez stated the Budget Committee met on May 8, 2007. He reported the committee reviewed both 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 budgets. He stated there had been a recommendation from Commissioner Browdy with reference to affordable housing and how the Commissioners should integrate the thought of affordable housing into the consideration when addressing hurricane and energy issues through the workplan. He stated Lorraine Ross spoke regarding insurance credits to make sure there was some coordination between the Florida Energy Commission and the Florida Building Commission with regard to initiatives for buildings.

REVIEW AND UPDATE OF COMMISSION WORKPLAN

Mr. Dixon conducted a review of the updated Commission workplan. (See Updated Commission Workplan May 2007)

Commissioner D’Andrea moved approval of the updated workplan. Commissioner Browdy entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

SUPPLEMENTAL RULE DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP ON RULE 9B-72, PRODUCT APPROVAL

Chairman Rodriguez stated the Product Approval Validation Workgroup has worked over one year to develop a consensus package of recommendations regarding the validation requirements of the Product Approval Rule. He further stated the Workgroup concluded their work in June 2006 and the Commission reviewed their recommendations during the fall of 2006. He then stated the Commission’s Product Approval POC held a special meeting January 24, 2007, to review proposed changes and provide the POCs recommendation to the Commission. He stated the POC met again February 5, 2007, and agreed with additional recommendations proposed by staff. He then stated at the February Rule Development Workshop the Commission adopted the changes recommended by the POC. Chairman Rodriguez further stated the supplemental workshop is an opportunity for the public to comment on the proposed revisions before the Commission proceeds with rule adoption. He then directed the Commission to Mr. Richmond who served as hearing officer.

Mr. Richmond called the hearing to order.

Mr. Madani stated the POC met the previous Sunday and addressed a number of proposed changes to the rule. He further stated he had a list of four items the committee would like incorporated into the record. (See Product Approval POC Report.).

Mr. Richmond closed the rule development workshop for 9B-72 after no public comments were made.

Chairman Rodriguez called for a vote to proceed with rule adoption for Rule 9B-72.

Commissioner Carson moved approval for rule adoption for Rule 9B-72 integrating and noticing the approved changes recommended by the POC. Commissioner Kim entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

Mr. Richmond advised the Commission of the error on SB 2836.

CS/HB 7057

Mr. Richmond referenced the Mitigation Bill, also known as Senate Bill

1864 as it went through Session, sponsored by Senator Posey. He explained the bill went through several gyrations and included the full text for the Commissioners to review. He stated if it did not affect the Commission directly, it could affect the members’ professional or personal lives, as well. He referred to page 8 of the bill, stating the My Safe Florida Homes grants have now been disallowed for purposes of roof deck attachments, secondary water barrier roof covering and to reinforce roof to wall connections. He stated he found it interesting because later in the bill, on pages 19 and 20, Section 4, the Wind-Loss Relativity Study conducted by ARA evaluated the requirements of the Building Code and the relative reduction in losses one could anticipate if the provisions of the Code were integrated. He further stated the study was performed to determine appropriate insurance discounts that should be available if these provisions were integrated. He then stated the bill provides for an update to that study, as well, with the inclusion of commercial construction in the study. He explained the study would be led and contracted by the Office of Insurance Regulation, but it requires consultation with the department and the Florida Building Commission. He stated the indications from OIR are showing the Commission will be expected to act as active participants.

Mr. Richmond then referred to Section 5, starting at the bottom of page 20, looks at Windstorm Loss mitigation and the requirements for roof and opening protection. He stated 2836 had a mitigation piece in it for some period of time. He explained that piece was stricken when the bill began to move to prevent conflicting requirements in bills. He stated this contains the mandates that had been left off of the version 2836. He stated specifically on page 22, the Commission is required to develop and adopt the measures that appear on the top of that page including prescriptive techniques for installation of gable end bracing, criteria for secondary water barriers for roofs and standards relating to secondary water barriers and prescriptive techniques for improvement of roof to wall connections in existing buildings, as well as strengthening and correcting roof decking attachments and fasteners during re-roofing. Mr. Richmond explained those have to be developed and adopted by separate rule by October 1, 2007, to take immediate effect and to be ruled into the next edition of the Code. He stated on page 23 it states “a roof replacement must incorporate the techniques of 2 and 4, the basic secondary water barrier as adopted by the Commission and the requirements for correcting the roof decking attachment deficiencies. He further stated if a building is seaward of the 120mph wind line and has an insured value, the value of the structure not the land, of $300,000.00 or more, the roof to wall connections are required to be improved upon re-roofing. He clarified the requirement applies only to site-built single-family residential structures. He noted the latter provision in C pertains to the opening protections and states “anytime a permit is pulled with a value of $50,000.00 or more than the work on a building that has an insured value of $750,000.00 or more are required to add opening protections as required within the code for new construction”. He stated that provision is also mirrored in the next section of the bill and basically provides it as a qualification for Citizens Insurance. He then stated as of January 1, 2009, essentially if no shutters are on a home that falls within that category, it will be required to add shutters or find an alternate insurer.

CS/HB 7123

Mr. Richmond stated this was the Energy Bill and he summarized the bill to

outline what the Commission is required to do. He explained the Commission requirements were as follows:

1) The Commission shall convene a work group to develop a model residential energy efficiency ordinance and would require a report by March 1, 2008.

2) Another stakeholder group will review the Florida Building Code for energy construction and look at the cost effectiveness of that analysis that provided the basis for that provision and look at the National Energy Conservation Code and ASRE Standards 90.1 and 90.2 in relation to where the Florida Energy Code is and report back to the legislature by March 1, 2008.

3) The Commission with other stakeholders will implement a public awareness campaign and develop the campaign to promote energy efficiency and the benefits pf building green by of January 1, 2008.

Mr. Richmond stated several items within HB 7123 are also covered by other

stakeholder groups. He explained the Public Service Commission has a few studies such as creating a new energy governance task force that will have some input on the bill. He stated the real key will be trying to get everyone coordinating and on the same page prior to March 1^st to avoid multiple reports from different governmental groups recommending different things.

CS/HB 2836

Mr. Richmond stated Section 1 was the Pool Grid Bonding requirement. He

further stated this bill does adopt an interim provision and suspends application of the National Electrical Code requirement for copper grid bonding and charges the Commission with reviewing it and adopting an alternate method. He stated there is no absolute deadline but it could be rolled into newest edition of the Florida Building Code, as well. He then stated Section 2 pertains to gravel roofs and is basically a review of the elimination of gravel roofs by the International Code. He continued by stating Section 3 of the bill pertains to licensure and has basically extended the time period from 90 days to 120 days for a plans examiner or building code inspector to have his provisional certificate. He stated this issue was one of Senator Constantine’s and was not brought up until later in the Session. He stated the next section was the glitch fix process striking the limitation upon the conclusion of the triennial update and adding things to federal or state law as grounds for which we can enter that process. He then stated the next section of the bill was the genesis of our hose companion which was HB 589. Mr. Richmond explained this does not do anything different than what already exists in law, but it needed to stay to match the bills up. He then discussed the next section which pertains to private provider system which is something the Senator had worked on. He stated he had attended several meetings between the Building Officials Association and Mr. Elswig’s representatives in Tallahassee.

Mr. Richmond then moved forward to the Education Initiative, on page 9, which needs to be reviewed relative to the glitch he had previously mentioned. He stated the intent was to allow the accreditors to do the work and not hold the courses up for coming before the Commission. He further stated complaints could be heard and then further action be taken against the accreditation of the course or the accreditor as necessary. He then stated language still remains that advanced modules must be approved by the Commission and he was not sure if that could be deferred to the accreditors. Mr. Richmond explained it does add two elements to the outreach program that had not been previously included. He noted the first was the Disaster Contractors Network, which is a process by which contractors are trained on integrating mitigation and techniques into repairs undertaken after a storm. He stated it also tried to hook these specially trained individuals up with victims of the storm. He noted the other is the Funding of the Southeastern Builders Conference although not called out by name has been rolled into this bill and is a product o an appropriation in the last section of this bill. He explained these items had been funded through the Residential Construction Mitigation Program, which has been housed the last few years at the Division of Emergency Management within the department. He stated the stakeholders felt it was more appropriate that it come to the Commission in the Codes Unit at the Department of Community Affairs. He further stated funding was secured from the Commission’s trust fund and the Commission was also assisted in defending against a 6 million dollar attack on the Commission’s trust fund to fund the Black Business Investment Board. Mr. Richmond then stated the budget staff at the department felt it was a good move to draw down that balance so it wouldn’t have such a large bulls eye drawn on it, in the event there are lean budget years in the future.

CS/HB 633

Mr. Richmond stated these had all been approved by the State Fire Marshal.

He noted Section 12, on page 15, refers to floor modifications and those pertained to the requirements of sprinklers in existing warehouses that are expanded. He stated SB 404 did pass and this bill had affirmative language in it that states when a warehouse is expanded it cannot be required that the existing portion, if it complies with the existing code, the 2001 edition of the code, to retrofit up to current standards. He further stated there had been a Florida specific requirement that redirected the results from the model codes in that regard. He explained this bill was drafted in an attempt to get that out of SB 404, but they were unwilling to take that out. He stated if the Commission moves forward and makes this change to the Code, as it is required to do at this point, hopefully it can be removed from the law next year. He then stated the last page contains another piece on energy that was contained in this bill. He noted Senator Constantine serves on the Florida Energy Commission as one of the legislative representatives and is very interested in energy.

Mr. Richmond stated this year along with the budget, the two other main issues were energy and insurance. He further stated this year, for the first time since the seventies, there was less revenue than last year. He stated the Commission had done pretty well with the budget from the past year noting all research initiatives were funded. He further stated there was no additional $100,000.00 in travel expenses that had been granted last year, which could pose some difficulty, but the Commission should be able to work around it.

Commissioner Gross asked what the four modifications were on page 15 that the Commission has to have a special review.

Mr. Richmond stated those modifications pertain to sprinkling in an existing warehouse that is being expanded. He explained there is a Florida specific change that would require the Commission to go back and retrofit the sprinklers in the existing portion of the building that would not be required under the International Code. He stated a change was proposed that was considered by the Fire TAC and it was mistakenly reported to them that it was not an issue, the International Code was fine and there was nothing Florida specific that needed to be changed. He further stated Mr. Madani had tried to correct this, but it had gone through without a second or discussion by the Fire TAC. He reported this was not the case and there is something Florida specific changes that require going back and upgrading the existing sprinkler system. He stated this bill would take that Florida specific amendment out.

Commissioner Browdy referenced page 15 dealing with the Florida Building Code compliance and mitigation program and the assignment of a four year contract to a non-profit. He stated the legislation specifically states the initial contract date must start before November 1, 2007. He asked when the RFP will be published for that particular service and if the Commission will have the opportunity to review the RFP before it is distributed, given the fact the Commission’s education component is basically being assigned in its entirety for the next four years to the nonprofit.

Mr. Richmond responded the bill has to be issued into a law before any RFP can be issued based on it, which could be within the next six weeks. He stated in terms of the review of the RFP, the key will be speed in getting it out the door. He explained to the extent that it can be done, a draft would be brought to the Commission for review and comments. He stated if it is a matter of getting the bill signed shortly after this meeting or possibly the next meeting chances would be the RFP would have to be put out before the next meeting of the Commission.

Chairman Rodriguez asked if the Commission had to wait for the bill to be signed before it begins to develop the RFP.

Ms. Jones responded a proposed RFP draft could be submitted to the Commission at the June meeting.

Mr. Richmond stated he wanted to discuss some other items that are not in the Commissioners packets. He stated carbon monoxide went through as a lighter version of the initial versions of that bill. He explained it does defer to the Commission’s rule making authority. He stated the comment period is still open on amendments. He further stated he would upload a copy of the bill as a comment to the changes that have been considered. He then stated there were no exemptions for mausoleums and columbaria. He stated Senator Christ was not aware of the impact of the language that was placed in his bill and is adamantly opposed to exempting these from the Code. He views them as potential for great liability for local governments in the event people do not keep up with their obligation to maintain them.

Chairman Rodriguez stated Mr. Dixon would review the workplan updates to reflect the legislature’s mandates to the Commission.

Commissioner Norkunas stated one of the things missing from the Commissioner’s packets was any changes to the 553.75 (5) for consideration of issuing binding opinions for accessibility. He further stated he had in-depth discussions with staff and stated he would be strongly advocating the Commission to bring some changes to that section. He stated he would be working with the Accessibility TAC. He continued by stating he had concluded too many people have their own opinions on Chapter 11 and while he did not think binding opinions would really work he is now sold that there needs to be a central focus for binding opinions. He then stated he had been advised perhaps in October when the next legislative package comes in if a strong enough argument is made to the Commission the changes could possibly be included in the next legislative package.

Mr. Dixon stated the Commissioner’s information packages were printed on Friday prior to the legislative session’s end later that evening so he would be going through the items projected on the screen. (See Updated Commission Workplan May 2007)

Energy

Commissioner Greiner asked if it were possible to fold some of those items from the Energy TAC into this.

Mr. Dixon answered yes and offered background information on item #2. He stated the Florida Energy Code was based on a cost/benefit analysis which established cost effective minimum criteria or energy performance levels. He further stated the last time the full evaluation was done was 1985 and that since that time evaluation had been done in pieces and not as a system whole. He explained this effort is to look at the entire building as a system to identify what would be cost effective measures that establish a required performance level. The analysis will be based on current technologies, current pricing of energy, current pricing of money, etc. Mr. Dixon further stated one of the requirements of current law is the Energy Code must be cost effective and the definition of cost effective under the Energy Code is cost effective to the consumer. He then stated this exercise is to determine if there are more opportunities to require better energy efficiency for buildings, in a manner that would not adversely affect the consumer. He concluded by stating the TACs items and issues would be folded into that analysis.

Electrical Bonding and Grounding of Pool Decks

Commissioner Greiner stated, if there is a rule development workshop in June there wouldn’t be enough time for that to roll into the 2007 Code.

Mr. Dixon responded there are two steps, one is a quick implementation for an alternative to what is in the currently recognized edition of the NEC and the other is 2007 Code also recognizing that alternative. He stated the 2007 can be fixed and integrated in through the glitch fix cycle, which would begin in 2008. He stated there are a number of items that can be fixed in the glitch cycle. He then stated there are opportunities for doing things quicker than he is recommending, but the issue is how these would be tracked. He stated the concept is to try and address all of the Code changes directed by the Legislature in a common way so they can be tracked and make sure they are done appropriately and on time.

Gravel and Stone Roofing Systems

No comments or questions from the commissioners.

Warehouse Expansions & Sprinkling Existing Portions of Expanded Warehouses

No comments or questions from the commissioners.

Energy Code Evaluations

No comments or questions from the commissioners.

Carbon Monoxide Detectors

No comments or questions from the commissioners.

Notification of Delayed Implementation of Internal Pressure Design Option

No comments or questions from the commissioners.

Windloss Mitigation Studies

Commissioner Greiner asked if everything handled through the glitch process will be included in the 2007 Code after it is printed and prior to effective date.

Mr. Dixon stated that was correct. They will be provided with the other glitch amendments.

Commissioner Greiner asked if the inclusions will be in the form of fold-in pages or replacement pages.

Mr. Dixon stated if there were a few glitches, which do not take up a lot of space, there may not be any replacement pages and it could be done as a supplement.

Commissioner Greiner asked how far prior to the effective date all of these would culminate.

Mr. Dixon stated it is listed in the workplan and the Glitch Rule is effective almost immediately before the Code takes effect. He added those items will have already been adopted and be in effect under the current code before the 2007 code goes into effect.

Commissioner Browdy asked if the additional items would be enforced by statute prior to the rule being in effect.

Mr. Dixon stated they would be adopted by a separate administrative rule. He further stated the rule for the Building Code is Rule 9B-3.047 and the Code is then a reference document of that rule. He stated Mr. Richmond had created a way of dealing with the situations where code changes have to be done immediately. This new method would adopt the criteria in a separate rule, i.e. something like a 9B-3.048 rule which establishes criteria and is enforced as it soon as it gets through Chapter 120 rule adoption. He explained that rule would be folded into the Building Code reference document in the future.

Commissioner Browdy stated it is quite an integration process and asked if the insurance mitigation part and the issues relating to rules of implementation of insurance credits, which also implies within the rule itself there will have to be some type of financial formula to rebate dollars back to consumer who used that.

Mr. Dixon responded he did not see those items going into the Code.

Commissioner Browdy asked if it would be more like a supplement to the existing Building Code.

Mr. Dixon explained what would go into the Code with respect to Wind Resistance Mitigation are just techniques for secondary water sealing, the additional nailing requirement is already in the Code. He stated the secondary water barrier i.e.; sealing the joints where the structural sheathing matches up, is a new requirement and there would be certain techniques that are recognized by the Code and a building official could accept. He explained there is no prescriptive method currently in the Code that the Building Official can recognize via the Code so they are requiring engineering and using the alternative methods and materials authority in the Code.

Commissioner Browdy asked how the consumer is going to receive the insurance benefits if their house meets the requirements of the new mitigation rule.

Mr. Dixon stated that is not a Building Department function.

Commissioner Kim stated it was his understanding the research ARA has done with loss of relativity studies would take into account the mitigation that was required by the Building Code. He explained that information would be forwarded to the Department of Financial Services and they would be the ones requiring insurance companies to adhere to those mitigation credits.

Commissioner Browdy stated he still did not understand how these insurance companies are going to know the mitigation techniques that are not integrated into the Code.

Commissioner Kim stated it would be whatever is currently in the system and an inspection by a recognized inspector or an affidavit by a contractor or engineer.

Mr. Madani stated the system currently in place relies on an affidavit from either the engineer or someone who has reviewed the plans for that building and has certified that such techniques had been used because there are certain things that cannot be inspected.

Mr. Dixon stated, with respect to how the roofing upgrade is determined, presumably the roofing contractor would certify for the homeowner that when the building was re-roofed it was done so in accordance with the requirements of the law. He further stated it is not proposed to create any new requirements that are not written into the law this session.

Commissioner Gross asked how the Commission was going to release the three immediate items.

Mr. Dixon stated those items would be in the form of a 2007 supplement.

Mr. Dixon asked for a motion to amend the workplan.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the updated workplan as amended. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Mr. Dixon stated another motion was needed to initiate rulemaking for establishing mitigation requirements and standards, alternative electrical bonding for pool decks, and requirements for carbon monoxide detectors in the proximity of sleeping rooms for homes that have fuel burning appliances, fireplaces or detached garages.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the motion as stated. Commissioner D’ Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Mr. Richmond stated if he could get contingent approval for a conference call during the week of special session on the property taxes once legislation is back it only takes two thirds vote to approve the call. He further stated he believed the call would be most beneficial placed midway through session to determine if anything developed.

Chairman Rodriguez asked if the call should be planned for Monday, June 18^th at 10:00am.

Mr. Richmond stated Monday, June 18^th would be a good time for the call.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the conference call for June 18^th at 10:00am. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Mr. Dixon recognized Mr. Richmond’s efforts in keeping track of legislative activity prior to the results being released, which enabled the Commission to have influence and resulted in deference to the Commission to develop technical criteria rather than having the specifics written into law.

Chairman Rodriguez thanked Mr. Richmond for his efforts.

Mr. Richmond stated he would also recognize the efforts of the stakeholder groups. He noted those groups did a lot of the work this year and stated everyone worked on a united front pursuing common interests.

Commissioner Greiner stated it was nice, after all these years, to have people looking to the Commission for input.

CONSIDER COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

Accessibility TAC

Commissioner Gross presented the report of the Accessibility TAC. (See Accessibility TAC Minutes May 7, 2007).

Commissioner Gross moved approval for the Commission to explore the possibility of the Florida Building Commission and the Federal Access Board to work together in training. Commissioner D’ Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner D’ Andrea entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Code Administration TAC

Commissioner D’ Andrea presented the report of the Code Administration TAC. (See Code Administration TAC Minutes May 8, 2007).

Commissioner Browdy moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Greiner entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried

Electrical TAC

Commissioner Carson presented the report of the Code Administration TAC. (See Electrical TAC Minutes May 8, 2007).

Commissioner D’ Andrea moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Tagliarini entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried

Energy TAC

Commissioner Greiner presented the report of the Fire Technical Advisory Committee. (See Energy TAC Minutes May7, 2007)

Commissioner D’ Andrea moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Fire TAC

Commissioner D’ Andrea presented the report of the Fire Technical Advisory Committee. (See Fire TAC Minutes May 8, 2007)

Commissioner Browdy moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Greiner entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Joint Fire TAC/Fire Code Advisory Council

Commissioner D’ Andrea presented the report of the Joint Fire TAC/Fire Code Advisory Council. (See Joint Fire TAC/Fire Code Advisory Council Meeting Minutes May 8, 2007)

Commissioner Browdy moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Carson entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Mechanical TAC

Commissioner Griffin presented the report of the Mechanical TAC. (See Mechanical TAC Meeting Minutes May 7, 2007)

Commissioner Browdy moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Greiner entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Plumbing TAC

Commissioner Vann presented the report of the Mechanical TAC. (See Plumbing TAC Meeting Minutes May 7, 2007)

Commissioner Goodloe moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Gonzalez entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Roofing TAC

Commissioner Schulte presented the report of the Mechanical TAC. (See Roofing TAC Meeting Minutes May 7, 2007).

Commissioner Vann moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Browdy entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Structural TAC

Commissioner Kim presented the report of the Structural TAC. (See Structural TAC Meeting Minutes May 7, 2007)

Commissioner Carson moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Goodloe entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Education POC

Chairman Browdy presented the report of the Education POC. (See Education POC Meeting Minutes May 8, 2007)

Commissioner Browdy requested the Commission’s approval of course BCIS

234 Advanced New Building Updates FBC with 2005/2006 Supplements.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the course. Commissioner Gross entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Commissioner Browdy requested the Commission’s approval of course FBC

Advanced 2004 Residential Floors, Walls and Roofs.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the course. Commissioner Kim entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Commissioner Browdy explained course 551.1 2004 Advanced Code IEQ Overview was deferred to make sure the course contained at least 50% of the FBC related agenda and will be reconsidered at the next Commission meeting.

Commissioner Browdy then asked for the Commission’s approval, in the form of a consent agenda, of the following courses which were updated courses to the 2006 Supplement of the FBC:

Advanced Code Mechanical Energy 82.1

Advanced Code Mechanical Energy Internet Course 83.1

Advance Code Plumbing Fuel Gas 80.1

Advanced Code Plumbing Fuel Gas 81.1

A motion was entered to approve the consent agenda. A second to the motion was entered. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Commissioner Schulte moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Vann entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Product Approval/Prototype Buildings/Manufactured Buildings POC

Commissioner Carson presented the report of the Product Approval/Prototype Buildings/Manufactured Buildings POC. (See Product Approval/Prototype Buildings/Manufactured Buildings POC Meeting Minutes May 8, 2007)

Commissioner Carson stated no RFP respondents were submitted for Prototype Building Administrator. He further stated the POC voted to temporarily suspend the Prototype Building Administrator program until interest warrants restarting the program.

Mr. Richmond explained there is no means or mechanism to formally suspend the rule. He stated the Commission can repeal it and if the interest develops, readopt it.

Commissioner Greiner asked if this was a legal way of suspending the rule and then appealing and reinstituting it if necessary.

Mr. Richmond explained there is no legal way to suspend the rule.

Commissioner Greiner asked if the Commission would have the ability to reconsider it.

Mr. Richmond responded stating the Commission does have the authority to bring it back as a new rule, through the adoption process.

Commissioner Browdy stated he believed the Prototype Building Program is one of the best programs the Commission has created. He further stated he did not believe the program was successfully marketed to the public. He continued by stating the program offered tremendous opportunities to accelerate the plan approval process by having statewide approval type programs that could be utilized throughout the state of Florida. He further stated he believed it to show the one element the FBC is about, a unified code. He then stated he did not believe the program should be suspended because no one submitted an RFP for the administration of that program. He suggested the Commission find an alternative such as contracting with BOAF to do statewide plan approval when plans are submitted to the department for that particular effort. He stated ARA was not successful in marketing the program. He further stated it is still a great program and he would discourage the Commission from letting it cease.

Commissioner Greiner stated he had two concerns: 1) the time it would take to bring it back up if it were repealed and 2) existing plans that are still in process and how they will proceed. He then entered a motion to approve the POC research working with BOAF to handle the program prior to appealing the program.

Mr. Richmond stated the program was sent out for new bids, but there were no responses. He further stated at this point, the program can be placed out for bid again. He then stated the problem would be the contract with ARA has expired or will expire soon. He explained at the expiration of that contract, anyone can submit a set of plans to the department and the Commission will have to approve them.

Commissioner Greiner asked since no one placed a bid, and if the ARA contract ends, whether the Commission could decide to allow BOAF to handle those until the Commission runs another bid process.

Chairman Rodriguez asked why the program could just not be put up for bid again.

Mr. Richmond explained the contract ends long before the next FBC can select a contract. He stated there is an extended process of putting the bid out and then selection process, during that interim the Commission would be responsible for plans approval under the time constraints of Chapter 120.

Chairman Rodriguez asked if it was possible to put it up for bid and go through the selection process prior to the June meeting and if not, could the Commission then take the necessary action before the Commission becomes responsible for approving any plans submitted.

Mr. Richmond stated at that point if there had been no response there would be a gap because initiation of rule making to repeal the rule would not have begun.

Ms. Jones interjected the bid could be sent out again, but a contract would not be in place by July 1^st. She stated ARA’s contract ends June 30^th.

Chairman Rodriguez asked if the contract with ARA could be extended for 30 days considering the circumstances.

Ms. Jones stated the contract could be extended, but it was ARA who has requested to be relieved of their contract.

Chairman Rodriguez stated if they have a contract, they will need to honor it until the Commission can find another solution. He further stated the issue is very important and there is a risk of exposure.

Mr. Dixon stated the purpose for the program originally was not for the commercial public, as that segment of the industry expressed no interest in the program to the study commission that created it. He explained the purpose of the program was to appease the state Department Management Services , who was the Building Department and construction manager for all state buildings. He further explained the new code systems gave local governments jurisdiction over state buildings. He stated DMS Secretary Bill Linder was building standardized buildings across the state. He then stated this particular program was to give him an option of having his plans approved by the state and then have inspections done by the local jurisdictions. He stated there could be complaints of the Prototype Building Program contractor not doing adequate marketing, but they did have people who came to the table who investigated, large contractors, and people who backed away. Mr. Dixon asked Ms. Jones if there was a financial commitment through BCIS or other things that are creating an ongoing financial commitment for the Commission.

Ms. Jones stated the only financial commitment is the amount the Commission has put into the development of the BCIS. She further stated the BCIS in currently in the midst of transferring from one technology to the other. She explained when they get to that point with prototype, redevelopment for the new BCIS format will be necessary.

Mr. Dixon suggested the Commission perform an assessment to determine the interest of the commercial builders and the major residential builders in the program to determine whether there is sufficient He added if there is no interest, let it go dormant.

Commissioner Carson stated the committee shares the same opinion as Commissioner Browdy relative to the potential of the program, but it does not know how to keep the ball rolling, so to speak, until that potential is reached.

Commissioner Kim stated he also agrees with both Commissioner Greiner and Commissioner Browdy. He further stated he did not understand why the program cannot continue. He then stated he did not believe any plans had been submitted, but if they had been the Commission could contract with an outside independent contractor to conduct the reviews to provide the recommendations and the Commission could approve them.

Mr. Richmond stated there would be a problem in shifting of funds. He explained if an independent contractor were hired, the payment for their services would have to come from the Commission’s budget. He further stated the funds reimbursed from the entity submitting the plans would go into the general fund. He stated in the past funds went directly from the applicant to the reviewer.

Ms. Jones stated contracts are engaged, but are generally the result of RFPs. She further stated in most instances contracts are not implemented without some type of bid.

Commissioner Kim stated there had been five or six contracts within the Structural TAC that had no RFPs.

Ms. Jones asked which ones he was referring to.

Commissioner Kim stated when the prescriptive requirements were being developed for the residential code.

Ms. Jones stated she was not sure what he was referring to, but RFPs are prepared.

Mr. Madani stated there are small consultants which are utilized to do review for very minor contracts.

Ms. Jones stated those are also done in response to bids.

Chairman Rodriguez asked if the ARA contract which is soon to expire is paid on a per review basis.

Ms. Jones explained the money goes directly to ARA from the vendor.

Mr. Richmond suggested a motion to notice a workshop for the June meeting for repeal of the rule, then at that meeting the Commission can decide what to do as the next step. He further stated in the meantime the RFP could be published for a second time to see if any responses are submitted.

Ms. Jones stated the RFP could run 10-14 days and there could be responses by the next meeting.

Mr. Richmond stated if responses are received the Commission could then withdraw from rulemaking at that time and continue with the program and the new contractor. He further stated if no responses are received, the repeal is in process and the Commission would be covered.

Commissioner Browdy stated if the program is looked at as solely marketing it to contractors alone to be the beneficiaries to the program, the broader picture will be missed. He further stated he believed design professionals have the opportunity to design buildings that have statewide applicability and usage, submit those designs to the review process and actually market pre-approved plans to be used statewide throughout Florida. He stated to his knowledge he did not believe that effort had ever been done by ARA, who exclusively focused on contractors. He then stated he appreciated the suggestion, but believed the program should continue not withstanding ARA’s desire to get out of their contract.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of a workshop and republication of the RFP. He stated he was not convinced that ARA didn’t do a great deal of marketing, whether it was in the right place or not is another issue. He then stated he believed the program to be a viable one and one that should continue. Commissioner Kim entered a second to the motion.

Chairman Rodriguez stated there are so many owners whose buildings are across the state, such as Walgreen’s, it is surprising it has not been utilized.

Commissioner Browdy stated a unified building code is emblematic.

Mr. Blair restated for clarification the motion is to issue another RFP and then conduct a workshop to consider repealing the Prototype Building Program.

Mr. Richmond stated a new contractor may want to tweak the rule, as well. He explained this maintains all of the Commission’s options.

Chairman Rodriguez called for a vote on the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Mr. Blair stated there was one additional issue regarding continuing education requirements for validation entities. He further stated the POC’s recommendation to the Commission was this was not needed and should be removed from the workplan. He explained it would require an action from the Commission.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the POC recommendation to remove the concept of continuing education requirements of the validation entities from the Commission’s workplan. Commissioner Greiner entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Commissioner Browdy moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Carson entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Window Work Group

Chairman Rodriguez stated the Window Work Group met in Tampa on April 10, 2007 with a revised scope to discuss and develop consensus recommendations for a template for installation instructions submitted for product approval. He further stated the Work Group developed consensus on product approval and if the Commission agrees with the recommendation, these recommendations will be implemented under the current rule effort on 9B-72.

Mr. Blair presented the report of the Window Work Group. (See Window Work Group Meeting Minutes April 10, 2007)

Commissioner Carson moved approval to accept the report. Commissioner Kim entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS AND ISSUES

Commissioner Norkunas stated he wanted to share an example of how difficult ADA or Accessibility education really is. He explained at the St. Augustine meeting an appellant came before the Commission after he had been denied based upon disproportionate costs i.e.; the waiver counsel had determined all costs of a building were included and the person appearing said it should not be done that way. He then stated he had spoken and advised the Commission that it was not supposed to count all costs. He stated at one point he had asked the Chairman if he did not understand an issue if he could abstain from the vote and the chairman had told him this was not possible. He continued stating Mr. Fine appeared before the Commission at this meeting and spoke about an issue of appeal. Commissioner Norkunas stated he did not understand a thing that Mr. Fine had said. He further stated when it comes to items he does not understand he looks to the Commissioners who have the expertise in specific areas to determine how he would vote, because he did not know what else to do. He then stated out of the 19 commissioners who were there during that specific vote, 13 did not think he knew what he was talking about. He stated the chairman had also once told him every voice is listened to here. He agreed with the chairman. He then stated the 13 members who did not think he knew what he was talking about or had knowledge that he didn’t have is their choice. He stated he had since found this was presented in declaratory statement 233 from 2005. He stated that declaratory statement states what he and the appellant were stating “the path of travel obligation triggered by the alteration is limited to those areas within the tenants lease space”. He stated he had also brought with him decisions from federal court cases which maintain it is not 20% of the entire building. He further stated the issue did come back before the Council and was granted for a different reason. He further stated there are consequences to these decisions. He stated the business Mr. Fine represented was either slowed down or shut down until the waiver was granted. He concluded by stating he would add another hour each day to his daily 24 hours of education.

Chairman Rodriguez stated he appreciated Commissioner Norkunas’ comments. He stated he was right with respect to the advantage of the Commission having members who each have an area of expertise, which makes that person the primary advocate for that which he or she knows best. He then stated he believed each Commissioner does the best they can do, but only so much can be done. He concluded by stating the advocacy and the respect the Commissioners have for each other carries through.

Commissioner Carson asked if four days meetings could be avoided, he would appreciate it.

Chairman Rodriguez responded it would be taken into account.

GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT

Larry Schneider,AI of Florida

Mr. Schneider expressed one request on behalf of his organization that they feel is very logical. He asked if the Building Code and the Fire Code are adopted in 2008, whether it could be called the 2008 Code instead of the 2007 Code.

Chairman Rodriguez asked if that could be done.

Mr. Dixon stated there is no prohibition from doing that but the law states it is done every three years and in essence switching somewhere in the middle indicates the three year update was not done.

Chairman Rodriguez stated it would be an appearance, but it has been done in three years. He further stated because of the rules that have to be followed, the printing, etc. it comes out in 2008. He asked if it was worse having a code come out in 2008 that says 2007 or to have someone doubt that the three year cycle was completed.

Commissioner Greiner stated if they were labeled differently than the three year cycle it would be confusing as to what version of the Code was current.

Chairman Rodriguez stated either way it was a precisionist. He stated it would stay as it is.

REVIEW COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS AND ISSUES FOR THE JUNE 24, 25, 26 AND 27, 2007 COMMISSION MEETING

Mr. Blair conducted a review of the committee assignments and issues for the June 2007 Commission meeting.

SUMMARY REVIEW OF MEETING WORK PRODUCTS

Mr. Blair provided a summary of the meeting work products that had been accomplished during the Commission meeting. (See Facilitator’s Report)

ADJOURN

Chairman Rodriguez adjourned the Florida Building Commission meeting at 10:40 a.m.