2018 International Residential Code – Building/Structural TAC 

IRC-Building Code Change No.	IRC-Building Section 	Change Summary b/t 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	Change Summary b/t 2017 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	Staff comments	
RB2-16	R202, M1305.1, M1407.4, M1503.4, M1601.1.2, M1601.4.1, M1803.3.5, M1803.4.3, M2204.2,
M2301.2.1, R1001.2.1, R1003.9.2, R202, R202 (New), R301.5, R302.7, R308.4.3, R308.4.6, R308.6.2,
R308.6.5, R310.5, R311.3, R807.1	Deletes definitions “ACCESSIBLE”, “ACCESSIBLE”. Adds definitions “READILY”, “ACCESS (TO)”, “READY ACESS (TO)”. Modifies Definitions “CLEANOUT”, “FIXTURE FITTING”. Modifies text of Table R301.5 “MINIMUM UNIFORMLY DISTRIBUTED LIVE LOADS”. 

Modifies text of Section R302.7 “Under-stair protection”, R308.4.3 “Glazing in windows”, R308.4.6 “Glazing adjacent to stairs and ramps”, R308.6.2 “Materials.” R308.6.5 “Screens not required”, R310.5 “Dwelling additions”, R311.3 “Floors and landings at exterior doors”, R807.1 “Attic access”, R1001.2.1 “Ash dump cleanout”, R1003.9.2 “Spark arrestors”, M1305.1 “Appliance access for inspection service, repair and replacement”, M1407.4 “Access”, M1503.4 “Makeup air required”, M1601.1.2 “Underground duct systems”, M1601.4.1 “Joints, seams and connections”, M1803.3.5 “Access,” M1803.4.3 “Connection to masonry fireplace flue,” M2204.2 “Shutoff valves”, M2301.2.1 “Access”.

The intent of this proposal is for clarification of terminology. This proposal will clarify where the provisions are for access
for repair, not accessibility for persons with disabilities. This clarifies the code by separating something that is accessible from something that is accessed. 

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This is a clarification of terminology that will have no change on code requirements.	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	
	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB6-16	R202	Adds definition “CRAWL SPACE.” to Section R202. Per reasoning necessary to create a definition that is appropriate and to distinguish those spaces from "basement".

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.  This is an editorial revision that will have no impact on construction costs.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB17-16	R301.2, R301.2(3) (New), R301.2(3)-continued (New), R301.2.2.1.1, R301.2.2.1.2	Modifies text of Section R301.2.2.1.1 “Alternate determination of seismic design category”, R301.2.2.1.2 “Alternative determination of Seismic Design Category E”. Adds new Figure R301.2(3). Deletes FIGURE R301.2(2) “SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES”. 

This proposal incorporates the most current seismic design maps prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in
collaboration with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC). A
separate coordinated code change updates the seismic design maps in the IBC to be consistent with these IRC maps and the
maps incorporated into ASCE 7-16.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. This code change can result in modest increases OR decreases in construction cost depending on geographic region. Where the
R301.2(2) Seismic Design Category maps are used, limited locations as illustrated by the attached USGS maps, will increase or decrease in Seismic Design Category, increasing or decreasing seismic bracing requirements and cost a modest amount. The amount of increase will vary depending on the specific change in Seismic Design Category, the wind bracing requirements, and the particulars of the dwelling and its construction. In some cases increases in Seismic Design Category and resulting cost can be reduced if not eliminated where the site soils allow the use of the Alternate Seismic Design Category maps. NIST GCR 14-917-26, Cost Analyses and Benefits for Earthquake-Resistant Construction in Memphis, Tennessee, provides one example of the magnitude of seismic design cost impact; the increment in cost for apartment building construction between design for code required wind loads and national seismic design provisions is on the order of one percent of construction cost.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B
(Seismic provisions do not apply to buildings in Florida)	
No action needed.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB23-16	R301.2.2, R301.2.2.4	Modifies text of Section R301.2.2 “Seismic provisions” and modifies R301.2.2.4 “Seismic Design Category E”. The purpose of this code change is to clarify the application of the IRC for seismic design. 

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The code change provides editorial clarifications to the application of the code in high-seismic areas. No seismic requirements are
added or removed with this change, thus there should be no impact on cost.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B
(Seismic provisions do not apply to buildings in Florida)	
No action needed	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB24-16	R301.2.2, R301.2.2.2, R301.2.2.2.1, R301.2.2.2.2, R301.2.2.2.3, R301.2.2.2.4, R301.2.2.2.5,
R301.2.2.3, R301.2.2.3.1, R301.2.2.3.2, R301.2.2.3.3, R301.2.2.3.4, R301.2.2.3.5, R301.2.2.3.6,
R301.2.2.3.7, R301.2.2.4, R301.2.2.6.1 (New), R301.2.2.6.2 (New), R301.2.2.6.3 (New), R301.2.2.6.4
(New), R301.2.2.6.5 (New), R301.2.2.6.6 (New), R301.2.2.6.7 (New)	Modifies text of Section R301.2.2 “Seismic provisions”, R301.2.2.2 “Weights of materials” , R301.2.2.3 “Stone and masonry veneer” , R301.2.2.4 “Masonry construction” , R301.2.2.5 “Concrete construction” , R301.2.2.6 “Irregular buildings”, R301.2.2.7 “Height limitations”, R301.2.2.8 “Cold-formed steel framing in Seismic Design Categories D0, D1 and D2”. Revises text of Section R301.2.2.9 “Masonry chimneys”, R301.2.2.10 “Anchorage of water heaters”, R301.2.2.11 “Seismic Design Category E”. Deleted Section R301.2.2.3.3 Masonry construction R301.2.2.2 Seismic Design Category C. R301.2.2.2.4 Concrete construction. R301.2.2.3 Seismic Design Categories D0, D1 and D2. R301.2.2.3.2 Stone and masonry veneer, R302.3.3.7 “Height Limitations”.

The purpose of this code change is to reorganize the seismic provisions of Chapter 3. Builders in regions of the country
where seismic design is required have expressed confusion regarding the requirements and limitations of Section R301.2.2

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The code change provides an editorial clarification and reorganization to the irregularity and material requirements and limitations in high-seismic areas. No seismic requirements are added or removed with this change, thus there should be no impact on cost.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B
(Seismic provisions do not apply to buildings in Florida)	
No action needed	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB160-16	R322.3.3, R322.3.4	Modifies text of Section R322.3.3 “Foundations”. Adds new section R322.3.4 “Concrete slabs”. Coastal high hazard areas (Zone V) and Coastal A Zones are portions of flood hazard areas along open shorelines where wave action will occur. The presence of concrete slabs can increase damage to elevated buildings, in part by shifting such that added loads or increased scour occurs on the building foundation. This proposal helps clarify what is intended by the requirement in R322.3.3.  The code change was further modified by public comment.  The public comment provides for a performance statement which would require assessment as to whether damage would result if slabs were displaced and two options. The first is prescriptive – slabs built as specified will break up when undermined by scour and erosion thus site-specific consideration of scour is not required. The second retains the requirement to consider erosion and local scour (removing the word "expected"), which is necessary for slabs to actually function as self-supporting slabs.
Final

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The free of obstruction requirement has been enforced by communities that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program and FEMA guidance has long advised the requirement can be satisfied by requiring concrete slabs to meet the proposed specifications.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	Flood provisions	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB161-16	R322.3.6 (New)	Adds new Section R322.3.6 “Stairways and ramps”. Coastal high hazard areas (Zone V) and Coastal A Zones are portions of flood hazard areas along open shorelines where wave action will occur. Stairways and ramp for dwellings are affected by flooding, erosion and scour and the presence of stairways and ramps can increase damage to elevated buildings. This proposal helps clarify what is intended by the requirement in R322.3.3 that the area below elevated buildings shall be free of obstructions. The code change was further modified by the Committee as follows:  In the modification, Section R322.3.6 Item 1 went from language that is wide open and vague to something that is concrete, which is very helpful in the code. The proposal adds needed clarity.
 Per comment “The purpose of this public comment is to revise and expand the guidance on stairways and ramps added by this proposal.”

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The requirement to avoid obstructions and to have elements below elevated buildings breakaway has been enforced by communities that participate in the NFIP, whether by enforcement of the IRC or local floodplain management regulations. FEMA guidance has long advised the requirement can be satisfied by requiring stairways and ramps to meet the proposed specifications.

	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	Flood provision	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB162-16	R322.3.6 (New)	Adds text of Section R322.3.6 “Decks and porches”. Coastal high hazard areas (Zone V) and Coastal A Zones are portions of flood hazard areas along open shorelines where wave action will occur. Decks and porches attached to or adjacent to dwellings are affected by flooding, erosion and scour. The presence of decks and porches can increase damage to elevated buildings unless they are constructed in ways intended to minimize damage. This proposal clarifies how decks and porches are treated and is based on the requirements of referenced standard ASCE 24-14, Flood Resistant Design and Construction and best practices documented in several publications issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The elevation requirement and free of obstruction requirement have been enforced by communities that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program and FEMA guidance has long advised the requirement can be satisfied by requiring decks and porches to meet the proposed specifications.

	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	Flood provision	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB164-16
	R324.3, R324.3.1, R324.4, R324.4.1, R324.5, R324.5.1, R324.5.2 (New), R907, R907.1,
R907.2, R907.3, R907.4, R907.5, R909, R909.1, R909.2, R909.3	Modifies Sections R324.3 “Photovoltaic systems”, R324.3.1 “Equipment listings”, R324.4 “Rooftop-mounted photovoltaic systems”, R324.4.1 “Structural requirements”, R324.4.1.1 “Roof live load”, R324.4.1.2 “Wind resistance”, R324.4.2 “Fire classification”, R324.4.3 “Roof penetrations”, R324.5 “Building-integrated photovoltaic systems”, R324.5.1 “Photovoltaic shingles”, Section R907 “ROOFTOP-MOUNTED PHOTOVOLTAIC PANEL SYSTEMS”. Adds new Section R324.5.2 “Fire classification”. 

Deletes Section R907.4 “Installation”, R907.5 “Photovoltaic panels and modules”, SECTION R909 “ROOFTOP-MOUNTED PHOTOVOLTAIC PANEL SYSTEMS”.

Proposal RM98-13 established R324, which was intended to consolidate and organize all the requirements, with
necessary section revisions and section additions, in an easily-used format that assists the user to find all the applicable requirements – fire, electrical, structural, plumbing, and mechanical – related to solar thermal and photovoltaic systems. The intent of this proposal is to address redundant code requirements and consolidate/reorganize requirements that were also included in Chapter 9 during the last code cycle. These changes will help to address any confusion regarding the installation of photovoltaic systems.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The proposal clarifies the applicable requirements for photovoltaic systems.

	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB165-16	R324.4.1	Revises text of section R324.4.1 “Roof live load”. This proposal is intended to clarify and correct the requirements for design loads for roofs with PV panels. The current code text is confusing, incomplete, and technically incorrect.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This proposal merely clarifies how loads are to be applied to the roof structure. Properly-designed roof structures should have been using the load cases in this proposal, so no change in cost or construction is anticipated.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB172-16	R202 (New), R401.4, R801.3R202 (New), R401.4, R801.3	Adds definitions “COLLAPSIBLE SOILS”, “COMPRESSIBLE SOILS”, “EXPANSIVE SOILS”. Modifies text of Section R401.4 “Soil tests”, R801.3 “Roof drainage”. There is currently no definition for collapsible soils to provide guidance to design professionals and building officials on identification and design procedures to address these soils. These terms are used in IRC Section R401.4 and R801.3.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
The change is for clarification so there is not change to construction requirements.

	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB173-16	R401.2	Modifies text of Section R401.2 “Requirements”. The recommendation is to eliminate the last sentence from Section R401.2 for clarification concerning gravel fill.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
This proposal will not increase the cost of construction because it merely seeks to provide clarification and eliminates superfluous language without changing the technical requirements of the code.
	This change is not similar to that of the FRC. The FRC provides for Florida specific changes to this section	Overlapping provision to be considered during step 2 of the code change process  

RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB176-16	R403.1.1	Modifies text of Section R403.1.1 “Minimum size.” This proposal simply adds one sentence to section R403.1.1 that points the reader to the precast footing section (Section R403.4) for instructions on constructing footings for precast.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This proposal will not increase the cost of construction because it only seeks to provide clarification by restoring a reference to precast footings that was lost in a previous code change. This proposal is not changing the technical requirements of the code.

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

RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB177-16	R403.1.6	Modifies text of Section R403.1.6 “Foundation anchorage”. This proposed revision is an editorial change intended to clarify the anchorage requirements for cold-formed steel wall assemblies.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
This is simply a proposed editorial change that does not affect the intended prescribed construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB178-16	R403.4	Modifies table R403.4 “MINIMUM DEPTH AND WIDTH OF CRUSHED STONE FOOTINGS”. This proposal changes this table to include both the depth (D) and width (W) as is already shown in figure R403.4(1). This table (Table R403.4 Minimum Depth of Crushed Stone Footings) only provides the Depth (D) in inches of crushed stone footings for precast, but the Width (W) is also needed to fully describe a crushed stone footing and how it spreads the load of the precast concrete wall into the soil.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This proposal will not increase the cost of construction because the changes to this table do not increase the average amount of
crushed stone that is typically used for footings to support precast foundations. It is already standard practice for builders and precast foundation manufacturers to include crushed stone footing widths (W) wider than the maximum widths (W) that are required in the table. Stone depths and widths in the table are minimums and in the field, these depths and widths are usually over estimated to assure minimums are easily met.
The width dimension (W) has been added to the table to prevent anyone from overlooking this important minimum dimension of a crushed stone footing. When recalculating all of the depths for the table, some of the crushed stone footing depths (D) also change by 1 inch, some increased and some decreased, but the changes are negligible and it will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB179-16	R403.3	Modifies text of table “MINIMUM FOOTING DEPTH AND INSULATION REQUIREMENTS FOR FROST-PROTECTED FOOTINGS IN HEATED BUILDINGS.” This proposal updates the IRC to be consistent with the latest published design values for insulation materials used on frost-protected shallow foundations (FPSF), per ASCE 32-01 Design and Construction of Frost-Protected Shallow Foundations; and to be consistent with the current requirements in the IBC.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. Depending on the project's design, this proposal may increase the cost of construction, as the design values for below-grade EPS and XPS are revised by this proposal. For most vertical applications, slightly less EPS or XPS will be needed to achieve the required thermal performance. For most horizontal applications, slightly more EPS or XPS will be needed.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB181-16	R403.4	Modifies text of  FIGURE R403.4 (2) “BASEMENT OR CRAWL SPACE WITH PRECAST FOUNDATION WALL ON SPREAD FOOTING”. This proposal updates the figure to add the dimension T for the footing thickness. The modification reverts the figure to the original with dimension T added. The proposed figure was too restrictive.  The code change was further modified by the Committee.  The modification reverts the figure to the original with dimension T added. The proposed figure was too restrictive.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. 
This proposal will not increase the cost of construction.
This proposal is NOT changing the technical requirements of the code, it is just clarifying the code by representing a more realistic
sill plate connection for a precast foundation and it is adding the thickness (T) dimension, which is currently missing from the figure 403.4(2). Concrete footing requirements remain the same.	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB184-16	R405.1	Modifies text of Section R405.1 Concrete or masonry foundations. Per reasoning "area to be protected" is unclear and should be specified in the code. Placing drain tile too high is a primary cause of leaking basements.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
There is no cost increase. Material & labor should be the same.	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB187-16	R408.3	Modifies text of Section R408.3 “Unvented crawl space”.  This code change allows another means of conditioning and controlling moisture, specifically dehumidification.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This is a no cost change. This is an option. It allows another approach to conditioning crawl spaces that is equal to or less cost
compared to providing supply and return air or an exhaust ventilation approach.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB189-16	R502.1.3, R602.1.3, R802.1.2	Modifies text of Section R502.1.3 “Structural glued laminated timbers”, R602.1.3 “Structural glued-laminated timbers”, R802.1.2 “Structural glued laminated timbers”. Adds new standards “ANSI 117-2015 Standard Specifications for Structural Glued Laminated Timber of Softwood Species” ANSI/AITC A190.1 and AITC 117 were renamed as ANSI A190.1 and ANSI 117 with the approval by ANSI. The new name for ANSI A190.1 found its way into Chapter 44 during the 2015 code cycle, but this change corrects references in code chapters.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
This code change will not increase the cost of construction. It simply changes the entity responsible for the maintenance of these standards from the now defunct AITC to APA-The Engineered Wood Association.

	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida. 	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB192-16	R502.6	Modifies text of Section R502.6 “Bearing”. Change provides better organization of this section for current construction
techniques and clarification.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	
No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB195-16	R505, R505.1.1, R505.1.3, R505.2.6.2, R505.3.2, R505.3.7	Modifies text of Section R505.1.1 “Applicability limits”, R505.1.3 “Floor trusses”, R505.2.6.2 “Web hole reinforcing”, R505.3.7 “Splicing”. Modifies text of Table R505.3.2 “ALLOWABLE SPANS FOR COLD-FORMED STEEL JOISTS—SINGLE OR CONTINUOUS SPANS”. Adds new standard “AISI S240-15, North American Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Structural Framing (2015)”. This proposal is intended to update the content of the Cold-Formed Steel (CFS) light-framed construction provisions of the IRC. 

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. The proposed changes to this section will not increase the cost of construction in general. While the overwhelming majority of the prescribed members have not changed or are reduced in size, there may be conditions for which the minimum member size will increase.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	
No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB198-16	507.3.5, R507, R507.1, R507.2, R507.2.1, R507.2.2, R507.2.3, R507.2.4, R507.3, R507.3
(New), R507.3.1, R507.3.2, R507.3.3, R507.3.4, R507.4, R507.5, R507.5.1, R507.6, R507.7, R507.7.1,
R507.8, R507.8 (New), R507.8.1, R507.8.1 (New)	Revises section R507.1 “Decks”. Modifies text of Sections R507.  R507.2 “Plastic composite deck boards, stair treads, guards, or handrails”, R507.2.1 “Labeling”, R507.2.2 “Flame spread index”, R507.2.3 “Decay resistance”, R507.2.4 “Termite resistance”, R507.2.5 “Installation of plastic composites”, R507.4 “Deck posts”, R507.4.1 “Deck post to deck footing”, R507.5 “Deck Beams”, R507.5.1 “Deck post to deck beam”, R507.6 “Deck joists”, R507.6.1 “Lateral restraint at supports”, R507.6.2 “Deck joist and deck beam bearing”, R507.7 “Decking”, R507.8.1.1 “Ledger details”, R507.8.1.2 “Band joist details”, R507.8.1.3 “Ledger to band joist fastener details”, R507.8.2 “Deck lateral load connection”. Adds new Section R507.3 “Deck footings”. R507.8 “Vertical and lateral supports”, R507.8.1 “Vertical supports”.

Modifies Figure R507.3 “TYPICAL DECK POSTS TO DECK FOOTINGS” and Figure R507.5 “Typical Deck Beam Spans”, R507.5.1 “DECK BEAM TO DECK POST”, R507.6 “
TYPICAL DECK JOIST SPANS”, R507.8.1.3(2) “PLACEMENT OF LAG SCREWS AND BOLTS IN BAND JOISTS”, R507.8.1.3(1) “PLACEMENT OF LAG SCREWS AND BOLTS IN LEDGERS”, R507.8.2(2) “DECK ATTACHMENT FOR LATERAL LOADS”, R507.8.2(1) “DECK ATTACHMENT FOR LATERAL LOADS”. Modifies table R507.4 “DECK POST HEIGHT”, Table R507.5 “DECK BEAM SPAN LENGTHS”, R507.6 “DECK JOIST SPANS FOR COMMON LUMBER SPECIES”, Table R507.7 “MAXIMUM JOIST SPACING”, TABLE R507.8.1.3(1) “DECK LEDGER CONNECTION TO BAND JOIST”, R507.8.1.3(2) “PLACEMENT OF LAG SCREWS AND BOLTS IN DECK LEDGERS AND BAND JOISTS.” The entire section is reorganized without any technical changes, based on similar organization in the IRC, namely, starting at the footings and working upward.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. There should be no cost impact, as this is purely a non-technical code change.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB200-16	R507, R507.5.1(2) (New), R507.6, R507.7, R507.7.1	Modifies text of Section R507.5 “Deck Beams”, R507.5.1 “Deck”, R507.5.2 “Deck beam connections to supports”, Table R507.5 “DECK BEAM SPAN LENGTHS”. Modified Figure R507.5.1(1) “TYPICAL DECK BEAM TO DECK POST CONNECTION”, Figure R507.5.1(2) “NOTCHED POST-TO-BEAM CONNECTION”, FIGURE R507.5 “TYPICAL DECK”. 

Moves together sections R507.6, R507.7 and R507.1 into a new section BEAMS. Provides new figures and updates table.   The code change was further modified by public comment to  correct an improper word choice in the original proposal.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
There is no cost impact. It may even save a few dollars by allowing single ply beams.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB202-16	507.3.5, R507, R507.2 (New), R507.2.1 (New), R507.2.1.1 (New), R507.2.3 (New), R507.2.4
(New), R507.2.5 (New), R507.3, R507.3.1, R507.3.2, R507.3.3, R507.3.4	Adds new sections to Section R507 “Exterior Decks”. Adds new section R507.2 “Materials”, R507.2.1 “Wood materials”, R507.2.1.1 “Engineered wood products”, R507.2.3 “Fasteners and connectors”, R507.2.4 “Flashing”, R507.2.5 “Alternate materials”. Adds new table R507.2.3 “FASTENER AND CONNECTOR SPECIFICATIONS FOR DECKS”. Modifies text of R507.2.2 “Plastic composite deck boards, stair treads, guards, or handrails”, R507.2.2.1 “Labeling”, R507.2.2.2 “Flame spread index”, R507.2.2.3 “Decay resistance”, R507.2.2.4 “Termite resistance”, R507.2.2.5 “Installation of plastic composites”.

This code change proposal provides design specifications for deck construction materials frequently found in deck construction. Includes design specifications for wood, fasteners and other materials.  The code change was further modified by the Committee.  The modification changes alternate to equivalent which is the more appropriate terminology.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. There is no cost impact. These materials are already required by other sections of the IRC for connecting members outdoors.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB203-16	R507, R507.2, R507.2.1, R507.2.2, R507.2.3, R507.2.4, R507.9.1 (New), R507.9.1.4 (New)	Modifies text of Section 507 “Exterior Decks”. R507.9 “Vertical and lateral supports at band joist”, R507.9.1 “Vertical supports”, R507.9.1.1 “Ledger details”, R507.9.1.2 “Band joist details”, R507.9.1.3 “Ledger to band joist details”, R507.9.1.4 “Alternate ledger details”, R507.9.2 “Lateral connection.”  Adds Table R507.9.1.3(1) “DECK LEDGER CONNECTION TO BAND JOIST”, Table R507.9.1.3.(2) “PLACEMENT OF LAG SCREWS AND BOLTS IN DECK LEDGERS AND BAND JOISTS”. 
Modifies Figure R507.9.1.3(1) “PLACEMENT OF LAG SCREWS AND BOLTS IN LEDGERS”, Figure R507.9.1.3(2) “PLACEMENT OF LAG SCREWS AND BOLTS IN BAND JOISTS”, Figure R507.9.2(1) “DECK ATTACHMENT FOR LATERAL LOADS”, R507.9.2(2) “DECK ATTACHMENT FOR LATERAL LOADS”.

This code change moves the deck ledger attachment and lateral resistance details from Section R507. 2 to the end of the section.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. There is no cost impact. This is a non-technical code change - it only moved the requirements from R507.2 to the end of the section.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB205-16	R507, R507.3 (New), R507.3.1 (New), R507.3.2 (New)	Adds new Sections R507.3 “Footings”, R507.3.1 “Minimum size”, R507.3.2 “Minimum depth”. This code change provides an exception for "freestanding wood patios" from having to comply with the requirement in R403 footings below frost line. It will allow a freestanding deck to be totally supported on the ground without any footings.  The code change was further modified by the Committee.  The modification moves the exception to the proper section.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
There is no cost impact. The code already provides an exception for footings below the frost line in Section R403.1.4.1 for freestanding decks.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB206-16	R507, R507.3 (New), R507.3.1 (New), R507.3.2 (New)	Adds new Sections R507.3 “Footing”, R507.3.1 “Minimum size”, R507.3.2 “Minimum depth”. This code change provides the specifications for when a freestanding deck can be constructed on precast concrete pier blocks at grade. 

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
There is no cost impact. The builder was always required to provide deck footings in accordance with Section 4.
In fact it might actually reduce the cost by giving prescriptive acceptance for footings on concrete pier blocks.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB207-16	R507, R507.3 (New), R507.3.1 (New), R507.3.2 (New), TABLE R507.3.1 (New)	Adds new section R507.3 “Footings”, R507.3.1 “Minimum size”, R507.3.2 “Minimum depth”.  Adds new Table R507.3.1 “MINIMUM FOOTING SIZE FOR DECKS”. This code change provides prescriptive language and a table for determining the minimum size and depth of deck footings based on tributary area, live load and soil bearing pressure. It provides the size based on either square or cylindrical footings.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. If deck footings were correctly sized in the past, there will not be a cost increase based on this table.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB208-16	R507, R507.3 (New), R507.3.1 (New), R507.3.2 (New)	Added text of Section R507.3 “Footings”, R507.3.1 “Minimum size”, R507.3.2 “Minimum depth”. This code change provides prescriptive language for where the minimum size and depth of deck footings can be found, namely in Chapter 4. It also copies an exception from R403.1.4.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. There will not be a cost impact. This code change does not alter the way deck footings have been sized under the current code
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB209-16	R507, R507.4	Modifies text of Section R507.7 “Decking”. Modifies text of R507.7 “MAXIMUM JOIST SPACING FOR DECKING”. This code change modifies the decking text to permit custom decking materials and custom fasteners.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
There is no cost impact. It may even save a bit by allowing proprietary fastening systems.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB210-16	R507, R507.5, R507.5.1, R507.7	Modifies text of Section R507.6 “Deck joists”, R507.6.1 “Deck joist”, R507.6.2 “Deck joist lateral restraint”. Modifies Table R507.6 “DECK JOIST SPANS FOR COMMON LUMBER SPECIES”. Adds Figure R507.6 “Typical Deck Joist Spans”. Modifies the joist text, replaces the figure, and amends a table.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. 
There is no cost impact. It could allow for longer cantilevers in some situations.	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB212-16	R507, R507.8, R507.8.1	Modifies text of Section R507.4 “Deck posts”, R507.4.1 “Deck post to deck footing connection”. Modifies Table R507.4 “DECK POST HEIGHT”. Modifies Figure R507.4.1 “TYPICAL DECK POSTS TO DECK FOOTINGS”. This code proposal relocates the deck post section. Also, it adds 8x8 posts to the table.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. There is no cost impact. This proposal adds more options to the table.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB213-16	R507.8, R507.8.1	Modifies text of Section R507.4 “Deck posts”, R507.4.1 “Deck post to deck footing”. Modifies Table R507.4 “Deck Post Height”. 
Modifies Figure R507.4.1 “TYPICAL DECK POSTS TO DECK FOOTINGS”.  This code proposal relocates the deck post section also adds an exception that says deck posts cannot use embedded soil for lateral support if the surrounding soils are
problematic. Modifies Figure.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. There is no cost impact. The code already requires lateral restraint at the bottom of the footings.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB214-16	R507, R507.8, R507.8.1	Modifies text of Section R507.4 “Deck posts”, R507.4.1 “Deck post to deck footing connection”. Modifies Table R507.4 “Deck Post Height”. Modifies Figure R507.4.1 “Deck post to deck footing connection”. This code change eliminates the wording that posts have to bear on footings. The new wording specifically allows new proprietary footing systems which may or may not have footing. This code change also provides a better drawing of how posts are to be attached to footings.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. There is no cost impact. The code already requires lateral restraint at the bottom of the footings. It may actually reduce the cost by
allowing optional proprietary footing systems.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB217-16	R602.1.11 (New), R610.10, R610.10.1, R610.2, R610.3, R610.3.1, R610.3.2, R610.3.3,
R610.3.4, R610.3.5, R610.3.6, R610.4, R610.4.1, R610.5, R610.5.1, R610.5.2, R610.5.3, R610.5.3
(New), R610.5.4 (New), R610.5.6 (New), R610.6, R610.7, R610.8, R610.9	Add new Section R602.1.11 “Structural insulated panels”. R610.5.3 “Panel to panel connection”, R610.5.4 “Corner framing”, R610.5.6 “Thermal barrier”. Modifies Section R610.3.2 “Lumber”, R610.3.3 “SIP screws”, R610.3.4 “Nails”, R610.4 “SIP wall panels”, R610.8 “Headers”. Modifies text of Section R610.2 “Applicability limits”, R610.5.5 “Wall bracing”. Modifies Table R610.8 “MAXIMUM SPANS FOR 11-7 /8 INCH OR DEEPER SIP HEADERS”. Adds new standards “ANSI/APA PRS 610.1. Standard for Performance-Rated Structural Insulated Panels in Wall Applications”. Delete Table R610.3 “MINIMUM PROPERTIES FOR POLYURETHANE INSULATION USED AS SIPS CORE, R610.3.2 MINIMUM PROPERTIES”. Deletes Section R610.3.1 “Core”, Section R610.3.2, R610.3.3 “Adhesive”, Section R610.4.1 “Labeling”. Delete and substitute Figure 610.5(1), Figure R610.5(2), Figure R610.5(3), Figure R610.5(5),  R610.8 Connection. Deletes Figure R610.8 “TYPICAL SIP WALL PANEL-TO-PANEL CONNECTION DETAILS”, R610.9 “Corner framing”. R610.3.1 “Core”.

The proposal is a minor reorganization and clarification of the Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) section. The intention is to
add clarity to the proposal as it is currently written. The original SIP language was based on the HUD document Prescriptive Method for Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) Used in Wall Systems in Residential Construction. The code change was further modified by the Committee.  The modification corrects several errors that occurred during the proposal submittal process.  Also, it was modified by public comment.  The public comment addresses Sections R610.3. Section R610.3 was inadvertently left out of the monograph. It references the new ANSI/APA standard for SIPs panels and is the justification for the removal of the core, facers, and adhesives tables from the code as these are covered in the standard.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This proposal reorganizes the existing provisions, corrects typo errors in text and figures, and recognizes new consensus standards.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
S243-16, Part II	IRC: R606.2.3	Modifies text of Section R606.2.3 “AAC masonry”. Adds new Standards ASTM C1691- 11 “Standard Specification for Unreinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (AAC) Masonry Units”, ASTM C1693-11 “Standard Specification for Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (AAC)”. This proposal updates the standard for autoclaved aerated concrete by deleting a withdrawn standard and adding two new standards for this product

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
Revision of this section does not impact the cost of construction. The definition is not needed, and the referenced standard has been withdrawn. The change merely eliminates this error in the IBC
	Same as change between 2015 IBC-B and 2018 IBC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
S245-16,  Part II	2103.1	Adds new Section R606.2.6 “Adhered manufactured stone masonry veneer units”. Adds new standard ASTM C1670-16 “Standard Specification for Adhered Manufactured Stone Masonry Veneer Units”. This proposal adds a new section for adhered manufactured stone masonry veneer and brings the current standard for design and installation of the product into the IRC.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
Adoption of this standard establishes minimum physical requirements for manufactured stone veneer units consistent with existing industry practices.

	Same as change between 2015 IBC-R and 2018 IBC-R		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
S275-16, Part II	R317.3.1, R317.3.3	Modifies text of Section R317.3.1 “Fasteners for preservative-treated wood”, R317.3.3 “Fasteners for fire-retardant-treated wood used in exterior applications or wet or damp locations”. The intention of this proposal is to better integrate staples into the code so that the provisions for small diameter fasteners (nail and timber rivets) also are explicitly extended to staples where applicable. The second part of this proposal is to specifically limit staples to stainless steel where exposed to high corrosion environments.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction.
Currently when staples are used in treated wood the only known available option is to use stainless steel staples. In this case there would be no cost increase in construction.
For use in treated wood if staples are not presently stainless then there would be a slight cost increase, however we do not feel that these staples would be code conforming. In this case any increase in performance would justify the additional cost
	Same as change between 2015 IBC-B and 2018 IBC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
S300-16, Part II	R702.3.1, R702.3.1.1 (New)	Modifies text of Section R702.3.1 “Materials”. Adds new Section R702.3.1.1 “Adhesives”. Adds new standard ASTM D 6464-03a(2009)e1 “Standard Specification for Expandable Foam Adhesives for Fastening Gypsum Wallboard to Wood Framing”. This proposal adds a new referenced standard, ASTM D 6464, which applies to expandable foam adhesives used with gypsum products. The code today refers only to ASTM C 557 for adhesives used with gypsum board, but not all adhesives are included in the scope of ASTM C 557. Additionally, the proposal adds a pointer to Table R702.3.5 or requires approved fastening methods for gypsum products using adhesives.  The code change was further modified by the Committee.  The modification corrects the reference standard number. With the modification this is a good code change that add a new standard for expandable foam adhesive.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
The proposal increases product selection options, but contains no mandatory requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC and 2018 IRC		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB218-16	R602.3(6) (New), R602.3.1	Modifies text of Section R602.3.1 “Stud size, height and spacing”. Adds Table R602.3(6) “ALTERNATE WOOD BEARING WALL STUD SIZE, HEIGHT AND SPACING.” The purpose of this code change is to introduce a new table for load-bearing studs over 10 feet in height but not exceeding
12 feet in height

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The code change will actually save builders the cost of hiring an engineer to design the portion of the building falling outside the
limits of Table R602.3(5) or Exception #2 of Section R602.3.1. The minimum cost to retain an engineer to design the limited area of tall studs is estimated to be $400 to $800. The code change will also allow 2x4 studs to be used in cases where 2x6 studs would have been needed previously, for a modest savings in material costs (about $3-4 per stud).

	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB219-16	R602.10.3, R602.3	Modifies text of Table R602.3(1) “FASTENING SCHEDULE”, Table R602.10.3 (4) “SEISMIC ADJUSTMENT FACTORS TO THE REQUIRED LENGTH OF WALL BRACING”. Revises length of the 10d Common nail, changes to top plate spice nailing. Added bridging to joists. Change to add 7/16” crown.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. Because these are mostly editorial corrections and correlations, it is not anticipated that the cost of construction will increase. For rows where the nailing changes slightly, current alternatives are also retained.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	
No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
R220-16	R602.3	Modifies text of Table R602.3(1) This change adds a new standardized roof sheathing ring shank (RSRS) nail for roof sheathing applications.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. An alternative nail is being added only, so there is no increase in cost since the current nailing alternatives may still be used.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB221-16	R602.3, R803.2.3	Modifies text of Table R602.3(1) “Fastening Schedule” and R803.2.3 “Installation”. Nailing requirements for common species of roof framing with specific gravities of 0.42 or
greater (e.g. SPF, Hem-Fir) were analyzed and it was found that the nail spacing requirements in footnote "f" needed to be slightly modified to clarify that nail spacing for all sheathing to framing attached to intermediate supports within 48" of roof end zones, eaves, and ridges must be reduced, not just at the gable end roof framing. A sentence was also added to R803.2.3 to clarify the appropriate limit on the distance unsupported sheathing can cantilever past the gable end roof framing

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The change to footnote "f" is a clarification of the current footnote "f" intent. The 9" limit on gable overhang is not really an increase in requirement, but a limitation to allow more efficient nailing patterns.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB226-16	R602.7, R602.7(2) (New)	Deletes table R602.7. Adds Table R602.7(2) “GIRDER SPANS AND HEADER SPANS FOR INTERIOR BEARING WALLS.” Proposal to update of Table R602.7(2). to address use of Southern Pine No. 2 in lieu of Southern Pine No. 1. Added Footnote "e" to clarify that header spans are based on laterally braced assumption such as when the header is raised.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. Increased cost may be associated with reduced spans that result from the not laterally braced condition and application of footnote e. Due to smaller building width column (12'), permissible use of Southern Pine No. 2, and the laterally braced assumption for tabulated spans, there are also cases where this change will not increase the cost of construction and may reduce cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB227-16	R602.7, R602.7(1) (New)	Deletes Table R602.7. Adds Table R602.7(1) “GIRDER SPANS AND HEADER SPANS FOR EXTERIOR BEARING WALLS”. The update of Table R602.7(1) Girder Spans and Header Spans for Exterior Bearing Walls is proposed. Updated spans address use of Southern Pine No. 2 in lieu of Southern Pine No. 1. Footnote "e" is added to clarify that header spans are based on laterally braced assumption such as when the header is raised.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. Increased cost may be associated with reduced spans that result from the not laterally braced condition and application of footnote f. Due to smaller building width column (12'), permissible use of Southern Pine No. 2, and the laterally braced assumption for tabulated spans, there are also cases where this change will not increase the cost of construction and may reduce cost of construction. 
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB228-16	R602.7.2	Modifies Figure R602.7.2 “Rim Board Header Construction”.  This figure revision clarifies requirements for joist hangers in rim board header applications.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This revision corrects the illustration detail in the previous code edition, and is primarily editorial in nature. Therefore, no increased cost are associated with this change.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	
No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB229-16	R602.7.5	Modifies text of Section R602.7.5 “Supports for headers”. Modifies Table R602.7.5 “MINIMUM NUMBER OF FULL HEIGHT STUDS AT EACH END OF HEADERS IN EXTERIOR WALLS”. change simplifies the full height stud (e.g. king stud) table while also removing conservatism and limited applicability of the 16" maximum stud spacing case.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The proposed table will require less full-height studs than are currently required in some circumstances, and will never require more than are currently required. Therefore the cost of construction will not increase.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB230-16	R602, R602.10.10, R602.10.3	Modifies text of table R602.10.3 (2) “WIND ADJUSTMENT FACTORS TO THE REQUIRED LENGTH OF WALL BRACING”. Table R602.10.3 (4) “SEISMIC ADJUSTMENT FACTORS TO THE REQUIRED LENGTH OF WALL BRACING”. Modifies Section R602.10.4.4 “Panel joints”. This code change proposal is intended to move requirements for construction of braced wall panels in R602.10.10 and
move it to the section on construction methods for braced wall panels in R602.10.4, and move an existing bracing amount correction from R602.10.10 (exception #3) into the Adjustment Factor Tables, R602.10.3(2) for wind and R602.10.3(4) for seismic.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This change should not increase the cost of construction. Under the 2015 IRC, it is possible that if the bracing amount is doubled, then blocking could be omitted for SFB, vertical GB, or HPS. This option will not be available if this proposal is approved. But the cost of the blocking is far less than the cost of doubling
the bracing amount so there should be no cost increase.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB231-16	R602, R602.10.3	Modifies text of Table R602.10.3(2) “WIND ADJUSTMENT FACTORS TO THE REQUIRED LENGTH OF WALL BRACING”. The added footnote clarifies how to apply the adjustment factor for Exposure Category when there are multiple categories on the site.

Cost Impact: Not listed.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB233-16	R602.10.3	Modifies text of table R602.10.3 (1) “BRACING REQUIREMENTS BASED ON WIND SPEED”. The callout for Footnote (c) was inadvertently left off of the table. This proposal places it in the table in the appropriate location.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	
No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB234-16	R602.10.3	Modifies text of table “R602.10.3 (2) WIND ADJUSTMENT FACTORS TO THE REQUIRED LENGTH OF WALL BRACING”. The proposed change does three things. It first makes the adjustment based on story height to put it in line with the seismic adjustment table as well as Section R301.3. Secondly, it limits the story height to 11'-7" per Section R301.3 and the new corresponding adjustment factor was interpolated based on the existing values for the adjustment factors for 11 and 12 feet. The third proposed change is to format the "ADJUSTMENT BASED ON" cell. 

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB235-16	R602.10.3, R602.10.4.1	Modifies text of table R602.10.3 (3) “BRACING REQUIREMENTS BASED ON SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY”. Modifies text of Section R602.10.4.1 “Mixing methods”.  Modification to the code by listing all the applicable bracing methods in the column heading for the seismic bracing length table, giving the user guidance on when all the methods can be combined, and adding the correct method for determining the length of bracing when certain methods are combined.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. 
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  Also, they are seismic design provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB237-16	R602.10.3	Modifies text of table R602.10.3 (4) “SEISMIC ADJUSTMENT FACTORS TO THE REQUIRED LENGTH OF WALL BRACING”. This proposal will correct the error resulting from the wording change at last cycle and bring the provisions back in line with the 2012 and earlier IRCs

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed
As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB239-16	R602.10.3, R602.10.6.5	Modifies text of table R602.10.3 (4) “SEISMIC ADJUSTMENT FACTORS TO THE REQUIRED LENGTH OF WALL BRACING”. Modifies text of R602.10.6.5 “Wall bracing for dwellings with stone and masonry veneer in Seismic Design
Categories D0, D1 and D2”. The intent of this code change is to provide another alternative in which a moderate amount of second story veneer is permitted with a moderate increase in the bracing wall length, while maintaining a similar level of seismic safety. 

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This proposal will notably reduce the cost of construction by removing the cost of most or all tie-down hardware. For one
example dwelling the cost savings is estimated to be approximately $3,500.00, including $3,000 for materials and labor to install tie-downs, and $500.00 in design costs.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  Also, they are seismic design provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB240-16	R602.10.4	Modifies text of table R602.10.4 “BRACING METHODS”. 8d common nails are no longer recommended for use with structural fiberboard sheathing

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. Other code approved, prescriptive methods are permitted in lieu of the 8d nail size. Therefore there is no cost increase associated
with this revision.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB241-16	R602.10.5	Modifies text of Section R602.10.5 “MINIMUM LENGTH OF BRACED WALL PANELS”. The proposed table was reorganized to place the portal frame bracing methods at the bottom of the table for clarity. This change proposal is the results of full-scale tests conducted to determine the correct way to measure portal frame height-to-leg-length aspect ratios.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. These provisions will not increase the cost of construction. It provides information based on full scale testing that will permit slightly
narrower portal frame leg lengths where appropriate based on the aspect ratio of the portal height as opposed to the wall height. The elimination of the conflict with the footnotes and the table discussed above should clarify, make the code easier to use and permit narrower panels to count toward bracing.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB243-16	R602.10.6.2	Modifies text of Figure R602.10.6.2 “METHOD PFH—PORTAL FRAME WITH HOLD-DOWNS”. The required nailing on the 3500 lb strap provides sufficient anchorage for the wood structural panel to framing connection while prevent the potential for splitting of the framing while anchoring the strap.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB244-16	R602.10.6.4	Modifies Figure R602.10.6.4 “METHOD CS-PF—CONTINUOUSLY SHEATHED PORTAL FRAME PANEL CONSTRUCTION”. Changed min wood structural panel sheathing to 3/8”.  Modified area to show two rows of nails to match other cut section views.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB245-16	R602.10.6.4	Modifies text of Figure “R602.10.6.4 METHOD CS-PF—CONTINUOUSLY SHEATHED PORTAL FRAME PANEL CONSTRUCTION”. The proposed code change more clearly states the intent of the language shown in the figure. Reference to Table R602.10.5.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB248-16	R603.1.1, R603.3.1, R603.3.1.1, R603.3.2, R603.3.2.1, R603.3.5, R603.6, R603.7, R603.8,
R603.9.2, R603.9.4.1	Modifies text of Section R603.1.1 “Applicability limits”, R603.3.5 “Splicing”, R603.6 “Headers”. Modifies text of Table R603.3.1 “WALL TO FOUNDATION OR FLOOR CONNECTION REQUIREMENTS”, Table R603.3.1.1 (1) “GABLE ENDWALL TO FLOOR CONNECTION REQUIREMENTS”, TABLE R603.3.1.1 (2) “GABLE ENDWALL BOTTOM TRACK TO FOUNDATION CONNECTION REQUIREMENTS”, TABLE R603.3.2 (2) thru (16) “__-FOOT-WIDE BUILDING SUPPORTING ROOF AND CEILING ONLY,” Table R603.3.2.1 (1) “ALL BUILDING WIDTHS GABLE ENDWALLS 8, 9 OR 10 FEET IN HEIGHT”, TABLE R603.3.2.1 (2) “ALL BUILDING WIDTHS GABLE ENDWALLS OVER 10 FEET IN HEIGHT”, TABLE R603.7 (2) “HEADER TO KING STUD CONNECTION REQUIREMENTS” , TABLE R603.8 “HEAD AND SILL TRACK SPAN”, TABLE R603.9.2 (1) “MINIMUM PERCENTAGE OF FULL-HEIGHT STRUCTURAL SHEATHING ON EXTERIOR WALLS”. Adds new standard “AISI S240-15, North American Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Structural Framing (2015)”.

This proposal is one in a series intended to update the content of the Cold-Formed Steel (CFS) light-framed construction provisions of the IRC. The proposed revisions align the IRC with the provisions of AISI S230-15, Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing - Prescriptive Method for One- and Two-Family Dwellings. Also, the applicable design wind speed is changed to less than 140 mph ultimate. The framing tables are revised to reflect the wind load increase and to align with ASCE 7-10.Directional Method.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. The proposed changes to this section will not increase the cost of construction in general. While the overwhelming majority of the
prescribed members have not changed or are reduced in size, there may be conditions for which the minimum member size will
increase.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  In addition, they are seismic design provisions that are not applicable to Florida.	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB249-16	R606.1	Modifies text of Section R606.1 “General”. Adds new standard “TMS 404-16 – Standard for the Design of Architectural Cast Stone”. Added standard TMS 404-16 to R606.1.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The addition of these news standards is an alternative to the existing IRC provisions based on existing industry best practices
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB254-16	R609.2	Modifies text of Section R609.2 “Performance”. This proposal is intended to clarify that the use of the 0.6 conversion multiplier is allowed with respect to the determination of design wind pressures in accordance with ASCE 7 and testing of the respective assemblies in accordance with Section R609.3 or
R609.5 accordingly.  The code change was further modified by the Committee.  The modification clarifies where the 0.6 multiplier is to be applied.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
This is a clarification. No substantive change.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB259-16	R202 (New), R609.6, R609.6.1, R609.6.2 (New)	Adds new definition “Impact Protective System”. Modifies text of Section R609.6 “Wind-borne debris protection”, R609.6.1 “Fenestration testing and labeling”. Adds new standards R609.6.2 “Impact protective systems testing and labeling”. The primary purpose of this code change is to require that impact protective systems (hurricane shutters) have a permanent label that provides a way for building owners, homeowners, and others to be able to determine their performance characteristics after the building has been occupied.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. Will result in an increase in cost. A consultant representing the industry estimates the cost of providing labels on impact resistant covering products to be as follows: 
a). Water Resistant Self-adhering Permanent Labels approximately $0.15 per label. Such labels would most likely be used on Accordion, Roll, Bahama, and Colonial style shutters.
b). Embossed or ink jet labels used on metal and plastic panels would cost approximately $0.05 per label.	This change is not similar to that of the FRC. The FRC provides for Florida specific changes to this section	Overlapping provision to be considered during step 2 of the code change process  

RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB260-16	R702.2.1	Modifies text of Section R702.2.1 “Gypsum plaster”. Adds new standards “ASTM C 841-03 (Reapproved 2013) Standard Specification for Installation of Interior Lathing and Furring” and “ASTM C 842-05 (Reapproved 2015) Standard Specification for Application of Interior Gypsum Plaster”. Adding ASTM C 841-03 and ASTM C 842-05 to Section R702.2.1 and reference to ASTM C844 added to R702.2.1.
 
Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
There is no cost of construction significance in this item.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB261-16	R702.2.2	Modifies text of Section R702.2.2 Cement plaster. Currently there is a misplacement error in the reference standards as listed in the current section. Deletes text of Section as well.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
There is no cost of construction significance in this item.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB264-16	R702.3.1	Modifies text of Section R702.3.1 “Materials”. Adds new standard “ASTM C 1766-13 Standard Specification for Factory-Laminated Gypsum Panel Products”.  ASTM C1766 was developed by ASTM subcommittee C11.01, assigned the responsibility for the development and maintenance of test methods and materials for gypsum products. 

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The proposal adds in a product standard that extends performance requirements for factory-laminated products to meet the current intent of the code. The proposal increases product selection options, but contains no mandatory requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB265-16	R702.3.3	Modifies text of Section R702.3.3 Cold-formed steel framing. Adds new standard “AISI S240-15, North American Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Structural Framing (2015)”. The screw penetration test, as referenced to ASTM C645, Section 10, has been incorporated into AISI S220-15, North American Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing - Non-Structural Members. Reference to AISI S220 is added to cover those requirements.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
This proposal is intended to update the referenced AISI standards and does not affect the intended prescribed construction requirements.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB276-16	R702.7.3	Modifies text of Section R702.7.3 “Minimum clear airspaces and vented openings for vented cladding”. Adding recognition of polypropylene to R702.7.3. 

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This change simply identifies another type of vented cladding.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB280-16	R703.1.1	Modifies text of Section R703.1.1 “Water resistance”.  Replaces references to veneer with “cladding”. Also the last sentence is deleted as it does not belong the section of the code and is addressed in the APA code change proposal on R702.7.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
This code change will not increase the cost of construction as it clarifies the intent of the original code provisions.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB282-16	R703.1.2, R703.11.1.4, R703.3, R703.3.1, R703.3.1 (New), R703.3.1.1 (New), R703.3.2	Modifies text of Section R703.1.2 “Wind resistance”, R703.3.1.1 “Wood structural panel soffit”, R703.3.1.2 “Vinyl soffit panels”, R703.3.2 “Wind limitations”.  Revises R703.3.1 “Soffit Installation”. Proposal, which was modified by committee, to improve the durability of soffits in high wind regions while allowing continued use of traditional soffit materials in the low wind regions. 

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. May result in an increase in the cost of construction for lower wind regions as the IRC doesn't specifically address soffit installation or attachment. However, any initial minimal up front construction costs will result in reduced owner residual risk through improved resilience to high wind loading, reduced wind driven rain associated damages and more than offset costs through mitigating already well documented failure modes and vulnerabilities.
	This change is not similar to that of the FRC. The FRC provides for Florida specific changes to this section	Overlapping provision to be considered during step 2 of the code change process  

RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB283-16	R703.2	Modifies text of Section R703.2 “Water-resistive barrier”. This proposal clarifies requirements for No. 15 asphalt felt and distinguishes requirements for other approved water resistive
barriers (WRBs) to improve application and enforceability.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. 
The proposal clarifies requirements and may actually help avoid unintended cost impacts or material choice limitations
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB284-16	R703.2	Modifies text of Section R703.2 Water-resistive barrier. Adds a water-resistive barrier requirement into R703.2 for detached accessary buildings.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. There is no cost impact as the water-resistive barrier is required by the manufacturer and should already be including in the cost of the installation. This code change simply eliminates confusion.
 	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB296-16	Table R702.1(3), R703.7, R703.7.1, R703.7.2	Modifies text of Table R702.1 (3) “CEMENT PLASTER PROPORTIONS, PARTS BY VOLUME.” Modifies Section R703.7 “Exterior plaster (stucco)”, adds exception to R703.7.1 “Lath.” Modifies text of R703.7.2 “Plaster”. The purpose of this code change is to correlate the requirements for exterior lath and plaster (stucco) with the requirements of ASTM C926 and C1063 and ACI 524R-08

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
The code change will not increase the cost of construction. The change corrects the designations for acceptable, currently available cement types clarifies that lath is not required where stucco is permitted to be placed directly on concrete or masonry surfaces.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB303-16	R703.8.4, R703.8.4(2) (New)	Modifies text of Section R703.8.4 “Anchorage”. Adds Table R703.8.4(2) “BRICK TIE MINIMIM FASTENING REQUIREMENTS (VERTICAL TIE SPACING/ HORIZONTAL TIE SPACING) FOR DIRECT APPLICATION OVER UP TO TWO INCHES OF FOAM TO MINIMUM 7/16 PERFORMANCE CATEGORY WOOD STRUCTURAL PANEL SHEATHING”. The proposed table provides brick-tie attachment recommendations for attachment direct to a minimum 7/16 performance category wood structural panels. As the wood structural panel thickness does not permit the full use of the nail's shank, it is essential that either ring-shank nails or screws be used to keep the brick veneer in place.  The code change was further modified by public comment to include Exposure B.  The above reflects this change.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. The proposed change will increase the cost of construction. The increase will be due to the use of ring-shank nails or screws over the more traditional nailed connections. The increase in construction costs can be partially offset by the fact that the builder will not have to locate the studs behind the various materials covering the studs (sheathing, foam, building paper) when attaching the brick ties, as attachment to the studs will not be required. The proposed solution will also eliminate the need to provide extra wall framing just to facilitate the attachment of the brick ties. The use of extra framing adds cost as well as reduces the thermal efficiency of the system.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB305-16	R703.11.2, R703.11.2 (New), R703.11.2.1, R703.11.2.2, R703.11.2.3	Modifies text of Section R703.11.2 “Installation over foam plastic sheathing”. Deletes Section R703.11.2.1 “Basic wind speed not exceeding 115 miles per hour and Exposure Category B”, R703.11.2.2 “Basic wind speed exceeding 115 miles per hour or Exposure Categories C and D”. R703.11.2.3 “Manufacturer specification”. Adds Table R703.11.2 “ADJUSTED MINIMUM DESIGN WIND PRESSURE REQUIREMENT FOR VINYL SIDING”. The provisions for application of vinyl siding with foam plastic sheathing are revised to coordinate with changes made last code cycle to address foam sheathing wind pressure resistance in Section R316.8 and to reference the clarified attachment requirements in Section R703.11.1 and R703.3.3.  In addition, the proposal improves and simplifies the installation requirements to comply with the latest industry standards. The modification further simplifies by eliminating the modification factor by providing a table to determine design wind pressures.  The code change was further modified by the Committee.  The modification further simplifies by eliminating the modification factor by providing a table to determine design wind pressures.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
This proposal simplifies the code and compliance while maintaining equivalent performance with no cost impact.
	This change is not similar to that of the FRC. The FRC provides for Florida specific changes to this section	Overlapping provision to be considered during step 2 of the code change process  

RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB307-16	R703.14, R703.14.1, R703.14.1.1, R703.14.1.2, R703.14.3 (New)	Modifies text of R703.14 and adds R703.14.3 “Flame spread index”. Proposal concerning flame spread index of polypropylene and siding.  The code change was further modified by the Committee.  The modification replicates the IBC language for polypropylene siding.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. The added requirements are consistent with those in the IBC and with requirements to ensure safe use of polypropylene siding.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB308-16	R703.15.1, R703.15.2	Modifies text of table R703.15.1 “CLADDING MINIMUM FASTENING REQUIREMENTS FOR DIRECT ATTACHMENT OVER FOAM PLASTIC SHEATHING TO SUPPORT CLADDING WEIGHT” and table R703.15.2 “FURRING MINIMUM FASTENING REQUIREMENTS FOR APPLICATION OVER FOAM PLASTIC SHEATHING TO SUPPORT CLADDING WEIGHT”. 

This proposal updates the table values to a consistent rounding approach by rounding the values down to the nearest
0.05" to address actual thicknesses of foam sheathing materials that often vary from nominal dimensions such as 0.5", 1", 1.5" 2", 3" and 4" as used in the existing table.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The proposal adds an additional option (18 psf cladding weight) and does not increase cost.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB309-16	R703.16.1, R703.16.2	Modifies text of Table R703.16.1 “CLADDING MINIMUM FASTENING REQUIREMENTS FOR DIRECT ATTACHMENT OVER FOAM PLASTIC SHEATHING TO SUPPORT CLADDING WEIGHT” and table R703.16.2 “FURRING MINIMUM FASTENING REQUIREMENTS FOR APPLICATION OVER FOAM PLASTIC SHEATHING TO SUPPORT CLADDING WEIGHT”.

This proposal updates the table values to a consistent rounding approach by rounding the values down to the nearest
0.05" to address actual thicknesses of foam sheathing materials that often vary from nominal dimensions such as 0.5", 1", 1.5", 2", 3", and 4" as used in the existing table.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This proposal adds an additional option (18 psf cladding weight) and does not increase cost.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB310-16	R802, R802.2, R802.3, R802.3 (New), R802.3.1, R802.3.2, R802.3.3, R802.4, R802.4 (New),
R802.4.3 (New), R802.4.4 (New), R802.4.6 (New), R802.5, R802.5 (New), R802.5.1, R802.5.2.2 (New)	Modifies text of Section R802 “Wood Roof Framing”, R802.3 “Ridge”, R802.4 “Rafters”, R802.4.1 “Rafter size”, R802.4.2 “Framing details”, R802.4.3 “Hips and Valleys”, R802.4.4 “Rafter supports”, R802.4.5 “Purlins”, R802.4.6 “Collar ties” , R802.5 “Ceiling joists”, R802.5.1 “Ceiling joist size”, R802.5.2 “Ceiling joist and rafter connections”, R802.5.2.1 “Ceiling joists lapped”, R802.5.2.2 “Rafter ties”, R802.5.2.3 “Blocking”.

Renumber the following tables:
R802.4(1) as R802.5.1(1) - no change to table.
R802.4(2) as R802.5.1(2) - no change to table.
R802.5.1(1) as R802.4.1(1) - no change to table.
R802.5.1(2) as R802.4.1(2) - no change to table.
R802.5.1(3) as R802.4.1(3) - no change to table.
R802.5.1(4) as R802.4.1(4) - no change to table.
R802.5.1(5) as R802.4.1(5) - no change to table.
R802.5.1(6) as R802.4.1(6) - no change to table.
R802.5.1(7) as R802.4.1(7) - no change to table.
R802.5.1(8) as R802.4.1(8) - no change to table.
R802.5.1(9) as R802.5.2 - no change to table.

Renumber Figure R802.5.1 as R802.4.5 and delete all cross references to section numbers from the table. Deletes "Note: Where ceiling joists...". Renumber the cross reference in Table R602.3(1), item 4: Table R802.5.1(9) as R802.5.2

This code proposal is a rewrite with minor technical changes. It is intended to reorganize the roof and ceiling assembly by
separating out the requirements of the components:

R802.3 Ridge
R802.4 Rafters
R802.5 Ceiling joists

The code change was further modified by the Committee. The modifications clarifies the continuous ties, provides a pointer for
the ridge strap back to the fastener table and adds the requirement for bearing for beams of roofs with slope less than 3:12. 

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This rewrite is essentially a non-technical code change intended to reorganize the section by components of the roof-ceiling
assembly. It should not impact the cost of roof construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB314-16	R802.1.5.4	Modifies text of Section R802.1.5.4 Labeling. This change clarifies that FRTW must have two labels: one for the grading of the wood, the other for the treatment. There are also
manufacturers making the claim for a lift of lumber or wood structural panel. The change clarifies each piece must be labeled with both marks.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. Manufacturer's treating in accordance with the code requirement for pressure treatment or other means during manufacturer already mark each piece. The proposal clarifies, for others, what is already being done.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed
As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB315-16	R802.1.8	Adds new Section R802.1.8 Prefabricated wood I-joists. This proposal adds prefabricated wood I-joists to the list of wood and wood-based products listed in the IRC for roof framing.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB319-16	R802.5.1	Modifies text of Section TABLE R802.5.1 (9) “RAFTER/CEILING JOIST HEEL JOINT CONNECTIONS”.  Footnote "f" should have been removed at the time footnote "h" was added to better account for the effect of rafter ties located above the bottom of the attic space. Proposal to address this.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, this section is part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB321-16	R804.1.1, R804.3.1.1, R804.3.2.1, R804.3.6, R804.3.7.1	Modifies text of Section R804.1.1 “Applicability limits”, R804.3.1.1 “Minimum ceiling joist size”, R804.3.6 “Roof trusses”. Revises Table R804.3.1.1(1) “CEILING JOIST SPANS 10 PSF LIVE LOAD (NO ATTIC STORAGE”, TABLE R804.3.1.1 (2) “CEILING JOIST SPANS 20 PSF LIVE LOAD (LIMITED ATTIC STORAGE”, TABLE R804.3.2.1 (1) “ROOF RAFTER SPANS”, TABLE R804.3.2.1 (2) “ULTIMATE DESIGN WIND SPEED TO EQUIVALENT SNOW LOAD CONVERSION”, TABLE 804.3.7.1
“REQUIRED LENGTHS FOR CEILING DIAPHRAGMS AT GABLE ENDWALLS GYPSUM BOARD SHEATHED, CEILING HEIGHT”. Adds new standard “AISI S240-15, North American Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Structural Framing (2015)”.

The proposed revisions align the IRC with the provisions of AISI S230-15, “Standard for Cold-Formed Steel Framing - Prescriptive Method for One- and Two-Family Dwellings”. The wind loads are adjusted to conform to the provisions of the ASCE 7-10 Directional Procedure, and the wind speed increments are modified to correlate with increments as shown in the wind speed maps (Figures R301.2(4)A and B).

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. The proposed changes to this section will not increase the cost of construction in general. While the overwhelming majority of the prescribed members have not changed or are reduced in size, there may be conditions for which the minimum member size will increase.

	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B	No action needed

As per R301.2.1.1 of the 2017 FRC, these sections are part of those prescriptive provisions that are not applicable to Florida.  	
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB323-16	R806.1, R806.3	Modifies text of Section R806.1 “Ventilation required”, R806.3 “Vent and insulation clearance”. This proposal is editorial and will bring the IRC requirements into alignment with the IBC ventilation requirements.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
The proposal is editorial and adds no additional requirements.

	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB324-16	R806.2	Modifies text of Section R806.2 “Minimum vent area”. The proposal is a clarification to align the IRC with the IBC requirements for the reduction in ventilation area. 

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction. The proposal may increase the cost of construction due to additional requirements to reduce the net free vent area.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB325-16	R806.2	Modifies text of Section R806.2 “Minimum vent area”. Due to property line separation requirements, restricting the lower vents to the eave or cornice, may not be achievable. The intent of this change does not restrict the use of eave or cornice vents when they are located in the bottom 1/3 of the attic space

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. Design flexibility will not increase costs.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB326-16	R806.5	Modifies text of Section R806.5 Unvented attic and unvented enclosed rafter assemblies. This is an editorial improvement, which makes the code clearer. There is no change in the requirements.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. 
This clarifies the code.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB327-16	R202 (New), R806.5	Modifies text of Section R806.5 “Unvented attic and unvented enclosed rafter assemblies”. Adds new definition “Vapor Diffusion Port”. The proposed code change allows the use of lower cost alternatives. Specifically, the proposed code change allows the use of fiberglass batts, blown cellulose and blown fiberglass to construct unvented attic assemblies.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
This will provide options.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB359-16	R1005.8	Adds new Section R1005.8 “Insulation shield”. Proposal to address insulation shield for factory-built chimneys.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. Will not increase cost as the insulation shield should already be used, however, when the code does not call it out as required many times it gets overlooked.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB360-16	AE101.1,AE101.2	Modifies Section AE101.1 “General”. Adds new Section AE101.2 “Flood hazard areas”. This proposal is editorial. The text current in an exception should be a separate section. It is not good code writing to have an exception written to add to the basic requirement.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
Proposal only clarifies and puts the provision in proper format.
			
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB365-16	202, AR101, AR101.1, AR102, AR102.1, AR103, AR103.1, AR103.2, AR103.2.1, AR103.2.2,
AR103.2.3, AR103.2.3 (New), AR103.2.4, AR103.2.4(1) (New), AR103.2.4(2) (New), AR103.2.4(3)
(New), AR103.3, AR103.3.1, AR103.3.2, AR103.3.3, AR103.3.4, AR103.4, AR103.4.1, AR103.4.2,
AR103.4.3, AR103.4.4, AR103.4.5, AR103.4.6, AR103.4.7, AR103.5, AR103.5.1, AR103.5.2,
AR103.5.3, AR103.5.4, AR103.5.5, AR104, AR104.1, AR104.2 (New), AR105	Modifies Section AR101.1 “Scope”, AR103.2.2 “Bracing”, AR103.2.3 “Requirements and properties of light straw-clay mixtures”, AR103.2.4 “Stabilization of light straw-clay”, AR103.3 “Materials”, AR103.3.1 “Straw requirements”, AR103.3.2 “Clay subsoil requirements”, AR103.3.3 “Light straw-clay mixture”, AR103.4 “Wall construction”, AR103.4.1 “Light straw-clay maximum thickness”, AR103.4.6 “Installation”, AR103.5.1 “Dimensional stability of light straw-clay prior to application of plaster finish”, AR103.5.2 “Plaster finish”, AR103.5.5 “Exterior cladding”, Section AR104 “Thermal Performance”, AR104.1 “Thermal characteristics”, AR104.2 “Thermal resistance”.

Modifies definitions of Section AR102. “CLAY SLIP”, “CLAY SUBSOIL”, “INFILL”, “LIGHT STRAW-CLAY”, “VOID”. Modifies Table AR103.2.3 “REQUIREMENTS AND PROPERTIES OF LIGHT STRAW-CLAY MIXTURES”. Modifies Figure R103.2.4(1) “ LIGHT STRAW-CLAY WALL WITH LARSEN TRUSSES”, Figure AR103.2.4(2) “LIGHT STRAW-CLAY WALL SINGLE STUD WIDTH”, FIGURE AR103.2.4(3) “LIGHT STRAW-CLAY WALL WITH BLIND STUDS”. Deletes Section AR103.3.3 “Clay slip” and Section AR105 “REFERENCED STANDARD”.

Updates to Appendix R Light Straw Clay Construction will provide clarification and incorporate new scientific information regarding material performance and construction methodology. This proposal adds new Figures and a Table, information previously published in the 2015 IRC Commentary Appendix R, and proposes text changes to certain Sections to coordinate with same.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B

Updates to Appendix R		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB366-16	AS101.1, AS102.1, AS103.4, AS103.5, AS104.4.5, AS104.4.6, AS104.4.8, AS105.2, AS105.4,
AS105.4.1, AS105.4.2, AS105.6.4, AS105.6.8, AS105.8 (New), AS106.11, AS106.12, AS106.13,
AS106.13.1, AS106.5	Modifies definitions of Section AS102.1 Definitions, LAID FLAT, MESH, ON-EDGE. , “PLASTER”.  Modifies Section AS103.4 “Moisture content”, AS103.5 “Density”, AS104.4.5 “Gypsum plaster”, AS104.4.6 “Lime plaster”, AS104.4.8 “Cement plaster”, AS105.2 “Building limitations and requirements for use of strawbale nonstructural walls”, AS105.4 “Out-of-plane resistance methods and unrestrained wall dimension limits”, AS105.4.1 “Determination of out-of-plane loading”, AS105.4.2 “Pins”, AS105.6.4 “Horizontal surfaces”, AS105.6.8 “Separation of wood and plaster”, AS106.11 “Transfer of loads to and from plaster skins”, AS106.12 “Load-bearing walls”, AS106.13 “Braced wall panels”, AS106.13.1 “Bale wall thickness”. 

Modifies Table AS105.4 “OUT-OF-PLANE RESISTANCE METHODS AND UNRESTRAINED WALL DIMENSION LIMITS”, TABLE AS106.13 (2) “BRACING REQUIREMENTS FOR STRAWBALE BRACED WALL PANELS BASED ON WIND SPEED”, TABLE AS106.13 (3) “BRACING REQUIREMENTS FOR STRAWBALE BRACED WALL PANELS BASED ON SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY”. Deletes AS106.5 Voids and stuffing.

The proposal is to simplify or clarify ambiguous language. Also to correct typographical errors, errata, and changes to referenced section numbers in the IRC that changed from the 2012 to the 2015 IRC, but were not identified in Appendix S in the process of publishing the 2015 IRC. And change "basic wind speed" to "ultimate design wind speed" terminology and wind speeds in Tables AS105.4 and AS106.13(2), and update associated braced wall panel lengths in Table AS106.13(2).

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The proposed changes in this proposal address matters of ambiguous language and corrections of errata. Therefore they have no cost impact.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B

Update Appendix S		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB367-16	AS101.2 (New), AS102.1, AS103.2, AS103.2 (New), AS105.1, AS105.1(1) (New), AS105.1(2)
(New), AS105.1(3) (New), AS105.1(4) (New), AS105.3, AS106.10, AS106.11, AS106.12.3 (New),
AS106.12.3.1 (New), AS106.15 (New), AS106.3	Modifies text of Section AS101.2 “Strawbale wall systems”, AS103.2 “Size”, AS105.1 “General”, AS105.3 “Sill plates”, AS106.3 “Foundations”, AS106.10 “Support of plaster skins”, AS106.11 “Transfer of loads to and from plaster skins”. Modifies FIGURE AS103.2 “APPROXIMATE DIMENSIONS OF COMMON STRAW BALES”, Figure AS101.2 “TYPICAL STRAWBALE WALL SYSTEMS”, FIGURE AS105.1(1) “TYPICAL BASE OF PLASTERED STRAWBALE WALL ON CONCRETE SLAB AND FOOTING”, FIGURE AS105.1(2) “TYPICAL BASE OF PLASTERED STRAWBALE WALL OVER RAISED FLOOR”, FIGURE AS105.1(3) “TYPICAL TOP OF LOAD-BEARING STRAWBALE WALL”, FIGURE AS105.1(4) “TYPICAL TOP OF POST-AND-BEAM WALL WITH PLASTERED STRAW BALE INFILL”. Adds new Section AS106.12.3 “Roof bearing assembly”, AS106.12.3.1 “Roof bearing assembly spanning openings”, AS106.15 “Post-and-beam with strawbale infill”. Modifies Definition of AS102.1 Definitions, “LAID FLAT”, “ON-EDGE”. Adds definition “ON-END”.  

This proposal brings seven Figures that illustrate strawbale wall systems and their components from the Commentary into
Appendix S.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B

Update Appendix S		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB368-16	AS102.1, AS104.2, AS104.4.3.1, AS104.4.3.2, AS104.4.4.1, AS105.3.1 (New), AS105.4,
AS105.6, AS105.6.9 (New), AS106.1, AS106.12.3 (New), AS106.12.3.1 (New), AS106.12.5 (New),
AS106.2 (New), AS108.1, AS108.2 (New), AS109	Modifies definitions of Section AS102.1 Definition, “CLAY SLIP”.  Adds definition “CLAY SUBSOIL” and “ON-END”. Modifies text of Section AS104.2 “Purpose, and where required”, AS104.4.3.1 “General”, AS104.4.3.2 “Clay subsoil requirements”, AS104.4.4.1 “General”, AS105.6 “Moisture control”, AS106.1 “General”, AS108.1 “R-value”. Modifies Table AS105.4 “OUT-OF-PLANE RESISTANCE METHODS AND UNRESTRAINED WALL DIMENSION LIMITS”. Adds new Section AS105.3.1 “Exterior sill plate flashing”, AS105.6.9 “Separation of exterior plaster and foundation”, AS106.2 “Building limitations and requirements for use of strawbale structural walls”, AS106.12.3 “Roof bearing assembly”, AS106.12.3.1 “Roof bearing assembly spanning openings”, AS106.12.5 “Post-and-beam with strawbale infill”, AS108.2 “Compliance with Section R302.10.1”. Adds new standard to AS109 “reference standards”, E2392/E2392M-10 “Standard Guide for Design of Earthen Wall Building Systems”.

The proposed code changes in this proposal create new or revised requirements relative to the appendix as first approved
for the 2015 IRC. These changes are based on further experience and additional input from prominent straw bale construction design and building professionals in different regions of the United States.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The proposed code changes in this proposal are minor relative to the overall system of strawbale construction and therefore will
have no cost impact when using this method of construction.
	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B

Update Appendix S		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
RB376-16	R703.8.4	Modifies text of table R703.8.4 “TIE ATTACHMENT AND AIRSPACE REQUIREMENTS”. This clarification to the code is proposed to acknowledge that the airspace may contain some mortar from construction as long as it provides drainage.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. This code change proposal is a clarification of the existing code language. It is intended to acknowledge and reflect more closely the common practice used in the field for the construction of anchored stone and masonry veneer construction. As such, there should be no cost impact.

	Same as change between 2015 IRC-B and 2018 IRC-B		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions     	

	

	

	

	
G10-16 Part IV	R202	Revises section R202 definition “Skylights and sloped glazing” to clarify which products fall under the “skylight” category.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction. The proposal simply clarifies which products fall under the category of "skylight", and by default, which do not. It will not impact the
cost of construction	Same as change between 2015 IBC and 2018 IBC		
RCCIWG – Comment

Impactful (Explain) 

	TAC Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):	Commission Action

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

 

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

Others (Explain):		
TAC	
Commission	

    No Action Needed	

	

	

 Overlapping provisions