HB 2358, HD3

3y ago
18 Views
2 Downloads
2.05 MB
86 Pages
Last View : 1m ago
Last Download : 3m ago
Upload by : Evelyn Loftin
Transcription

HB 2358, HD3RELATING TO THE BUILDING CODE,Description:Establishes the Hawaii State Building Code, Hawaii State BuildingCode Council, and Natural Disaster Preparedness Commission.Effective July 1, 2030 (HB2358 HD3)

NEIL ABERCROMBIEDean H. SekIGOVERNORActing ComptrollerJan S. GouveIaDeputy ComptrollerSTATE OF HAWAIIDEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTINGAND GENERAL SERVICESP.o. BOX 119HONOLULU. HAWAII 96810-0119WRITTEN TESTIMONYOFDEAN H. SEKI, ACTING COMPTROLLERDEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTING AND GENERAL SERVICESTO THESENATE COMMITTEEONPUBLIC SAFETY, GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, AND MILITARY AFFAIRSONMarch 20, 2012H.B. 2358, H.D. 3RELATING TO THE BUILDING CODEChair Espero and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to submitwritten testimony on H.B. 2358, H.D. 3.The Department of Accounting and General Services (DAGS) opposes H.B. 2358,H.D.3.DAGS opposes this bill as it restructures the state Building Code Council (the Council)and creates the Natural Disaster Preparedness Commission (Commission). Our opposition isbased on the following concerns:1. There will be an increase in effort as two agencies, the Council and theCommission, will be reviewing building codes for adoption;2. The length of time to adopt codes will not be decreased and may in fact increase;

3. The challenges with adoption of new building codes by the respective countycouncils will remain; and4. Taxpayer funding will be required to operate these two agencies which have noadministrative responsibilities (i.e., permitting and inspection) over the buildingcodes as this is a county function.As an alternative, we would suggest that the language in H.B. 2434 be revisited as thatbill would reduce bureaucracy (by eliminating the Council) and reduce the time required forbuilding code adoption as the State model building codes would be adopted as published,eliminating the need for review by the Council. H.B. 2434 provides that the latest version of thefour basic building codes (i.e., the International Building Code, International EnergyConservation Code, the Uniform Plumbing Code and the National Electrical Code) will be theState codes at time of publication, eliminating the 18 month adoption period by the Council andstarting the clock for county adoption at publication date. H.B. 2434 also provides for a broaderset of codes than just the International Building Code which is reflected in H.B. 2358, H.D. 3.Additionally, the counties, which have the administrative functions, would have authority toamend the State codes to address geographical and cultural differences without the Council'sapproval which is required in H.B. 2358, H.D. 3.Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony on this matter.

NEIL ABERCROMBIEGOVERNORRICHARD C. LIMDEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS,ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TOURISMNo.1 Capitol District Building, 250 South Hotel Street, 5th Floor, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2359, Honolulu, Hawaii 96804Web site: WVJIN.hawail.gov/dbedtDIRECTORMARY ALICE EVANSDEPUTY DIRECTORTelephone:Fax:(808) 586·2355(808) 586-2377Statement ofRICHARD C. LIMDirectorDepartment of Business, Economic Development, and Tourismbefore theSENATE COMMITTEEonPUBLIC SAFETY, GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, AND MILITARYTuesday, March 20,20123:20pmState Capitol, Conference Room 224in consideration ofHB2358,HD3RELATING TO THE BUILDING CODE.Chair Espero, Vice Chair Kidani, and members of the committee.The Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism (DBEDT) stronglyopposes HB2358, HD3 which dramatically amends the State Building Code Council (Council)and detrimentally strips the building code specialists of their responsibilities.The bill would remove code-making authority of the four county building divisionmanagers.DBEDT recommends continuing the Council and providing funding support, providedthat funding support does not adversely impact priorities indicated in our Executive Budget.Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this bill.HB2358 HD3 - BED- 03-20-12- PGM

NEIL ABERCROMBIEGOVERNORRICHARD C. UMDIRECTORMARY AUCE EVANSDEPARTM ENT OF BUSINESS,ECONOM IC DEVELOPM ENT & TOURISMOFFICE OF PLANNING235 South Beretania Street, 6th Floor, Honolulu. Hawaii 96813Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2359, Honolulu, Hawaii 96804DEPUTY DIRECTORJESSE K. SOUKIDIRECTOROFACE OF PlANNINGTelephone: (808) 587-2846Fax: (808) 587-2824Statement ofJESSE K. SOUIaDirector, Office of PlanningDepartment of Business, Economic Development, and Tourismbefore theSENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY, GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,AND MILITARY AFFAIRSTuesday, March 20, 20123:20PMState Capitol, Conference Room 224in consideration ofHB 2358, HD3RELATING TO THE BUILDING CODE.Chair Espero, Vice Chair Kidani, and Members of the Senate Committee on PublicSafety, Government Operations, and Military Affairs.The Office of Planning (OP) strongly opposes this bill which seeks to amend HawaiiRevised Statutes (HRS) ch. 107, pt. II (Supp. 2007) on State Building Code and DesignStandards and related laws.OP administers HRS ch. 205A, the Coastal Zone Management (CZM) law. An objectiveof the CZM law is to reduce the loss oflife and property from coastal hazards. The purpose ofbuilding codes is to establish minimum acceptable standards necessary for preserving the publichealth, safety, and welfare, and to protect property. Thus, building codes and the quality ofdesign and construction of structures playa direct role in protection of life and property in anatural disaster.Such mitigation also plays a pivotal role in the financial costs of a disaster. In 2005, theMultihazard Mitigation Council conducted a congressionally mandated study, Natural HazardMitigation Saves: An Independent Study to Assess the Future Savings from Mitigation Activities,

which documented how every 1 spent on mitigation saves society an average of 4. The studyis widely known and cited, and remains relevant today.To address the coastal hazard mitigation objective of the CZM laws, OP applied for andreceived a federal Section 309 Enhancement Area Grant for fiscal years 2006-2010, focused onthe building of resilient communities statewide throug new building codes with hurricanedesign standards customized for the unique terrain of the islands of Hawaii. The work under thegrant consisted of adoption of state-of-the-art building codes with customized coastal hazardmitigation standards throughout the State of Hawaii; provision of high quality training oninterpretation and application of the building codes; and public outreach and education on naturalhazard mitigation.Development of the project proposal included detailed analyses of statewide hazardmitigation priorities. It was determined that completion of the wind speed assessments and winddesign standards was a state priority. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) approved State Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, the County of Hawaii Multi-Hazard MitigationPlan, and the Hawaii Geographic Information Coordination Council's I-Plan all recognized theneed importance of upgrading the building codes.Customized wind design standards and maps were developed for the State of Hawaiiutilizing funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) andFEMA with the concurrence of each county, during the period spanning 2005-2008. In 2008, theAmerican Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7 Standards Committee revised the 2005 Editionof ASCE 7 by designating the State of Hawaii as a Special Wind Region. This designation issignificant as it represents a national acceptance of the technical accuracy of the Hawaii winddesign standards and it recognizes that for Hawaii, those standards supersede the moregeneralized national wind standards.OP initiated training of design professionals and building officials in the private andpublic sectors in the International Codes in May 2007. In doing so, OP has worked inpartnership with the building divisions of each of the four counties, the state agencies withdesign, building, and management responsibilities, the local chapters of the American Institute ofArchitects and the Construction Specifications Institute, the Structural Engineers Association of-2-

Hawaii, and the Hawaii Association of County Building Officials. Training has been heldconsistently since its inception in May 2007. Professional trainers in the International Codes, aswell as local experts, have provided training in all four counties of the State.The bill repeals the structure of a comprehensive building code under HRS ch. 107, byrepealing the requirements for plumbing, electrical, and health-related codes. Of great concern isthe repeal of residential and hurricane resistive standards for residential construction. Thesestandards would cover one- and two-family detached dwellings and multiple single-familydwellings. In effect, the wind design standards would no longer be required on a uniform basisthroughout the State, which will negate hurricane resistance, leading to great human loss, healthand social costs, property damage, business interruption, and state liability in the event of ahurricane.Of equally great concern is the bill's diminishment of the basic role of government insafeguarding health, safety, property, and public welfare. In so doing, the statewide communityis subject to greater loss of life and property from natural disasters. Post-disaster assistance fromFEMA will be severely limited as FEMA grants aid based on the building codes in place prior tothe disaster. OP therefore strongly recommends that this bill be held in Committee.Please note that House Standing Committee Report No. 936-12 is in error in its statementnaming a large number of organizations and individuals as testitying in support of this bill. Infact, those testimonies were in strong opposition to this bill.Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on this measure.-3-

srAlECFHAWAIlIFAAfMENTCF CEFENS::lESllMONY ON HOlEE BIll. 2358 HD3A BIll. RELATING TO ll-E BUILDING CClI:Effi :ENTATION TO THEOOMMITTEE ON PUBlX: SlIfEIYAND MILITJIRY AFFAIR: BYMAJCRC?EN3 II.DAARY1l.D. M. WONGADJUTANT GEf\ERALMarch 20, 2012Chair Espero, Vice Chair Kidani, Committee Members:I am Major General Darryll Wong, Adjutant General for the State of Hawaii and Director of CivilDefense, and I am testifying in CH'a ITION to HB 2358 HD3.HB 2358 HD3 proposes many changes to the Hawaii state building code that will threatens thelife and safety of the people of Hawaii. The most dangerous proposition in this measure is theexemption of State construction from Hawaii State building code requirements. This exemptionwould result in a severe shortage of suitable facilities for the State Public Shelter Program andwill contribute to loss of life or injury to Hawaii residents or visitors seeking shelter in anemergency.The State Public Shelter Program relies on state Department of Education facilities. Theelimination of wind resistive criteria from the state building code will result in fewer buildingsmeeting shelter criteria. Currently, we are 74,619 shelter spaoes short based on a planningestimate of 35% of the popUlation evacuating and needing shelter. This shortage will furtherincrease if HB 2358 HD3 is passed.HB 2358 HD3 also seeks to amend the Hawaii State building code to exclude the State Fire Code,the Uniform Building Code, Design Standards pursuant to Act 5, 2005, and code provisions thatare based on nationally published codes or standards.The current bill language proposes to establish a single code that will supersede all existingcodes, which will eliminate existing County and State building codes. As the bill also removesthe requirement that the State Building Code be updated within specific periods to the mostcurrent model code, the effective building code will be more than two decades old.

The bill also gives the State Building Code Council sole authority to determine minimum codestandards, but the proposed composition of the Hawaii State building code council is a thirteenmember body that primarily includes industry representatives. The bill proposes that the votingmembership of the State Building Code Council include private interest groups and industryrepresentatives, to the near-exclusion and replacement of the technical professionals whosefocus is life and safety requirements for building design and construction. Proposed forexclusion are the county building code inspectors as voting members of the council, and removalof the Department of Health and the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations.The change in the composition of the State Building Code Council as this bill proposes will resultin a Council that lacks the expertise to make recommendations for the construction ofcommercial and residential structures that are resilient and hardened to withstand naturalhazard risks.HB 2358 HD3 also proposes the removal of energy conservation standards for building designand construction. This proposal deviates from the State's commitment to growing a sustainableeconomy, and is a step backward from energy independence and environmental stewardship.The current language of the bill proposes the new formation of a natural disaster preparednesscommission. The commission would be a replication of natural disaster committees presently inplace and which do not require an appropriation such as that proposed. The Hawaii StateEarthquake Advisory Committee and the State Hazard Mitigation Forum by their charterssupport the activities outlined by the proposed bill.The amendments proposed by HB 2358 HD3 may increase construction activity and benefit thestate in the short term; however, it would represent a giant step backward in the safety andretrofit of buildings and could cost lives when a large scale disaster hits Hawaii.Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on HB 2358 HD3.

DWIGHTTAKAMINEDIRECTORNEIL ABERCROMBIEGOVERNORAUOREY HIDANOOEPUTY DIRECTORSTATEOFHAWAIIDEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS8aO,'PUNGHB,OWLSTAEET, AOOM,321HONOLULU, HAWAU 99813www.hawail goyllaborPhone: (80B} 586-SB;42l Fax: , (8.08) 586-9099Email: d!ir.djrector ha.ll.aii.govMarch 19,2012The Honorable Will Espero, ChairCommittee on Public Safety, GovernmentOperations, and Military AffairsThe State Senatestate Capitol, Room 231Honolulu, Hawaii 96813Dear Chair Espero:SUbject: H.B. 2358, H.D. 3 Relating to the Building CodeI am Kenneth G. SiMI, Chaii' of th.e State Fire Council (SFC) and Fire Chief of the Honolulu FireDepartment (HFD). The. SFC and the HFD strongly oppose H.B. 2358, H.D. 3 for severalreasons and offer the following comments foryourconsideration:We oppose thebill's language in the proposed revision to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) 132-3that the SFC will only propose a state fire code to the State Building Code Council (SBCC).Since its formation in 1979 by the Hawaii State Legislature, the SFC was statutorily empoweredto review and aqopt the state fire code. Prior to 1979, the Hawai.i State Fire Marshal., which wasa state-funded agency, was required to review and adopta state fire code. The majority of the50 states empower the state Fire Marshal to review and adopt a state fire code. The state firecode prescribes minimum requirements hecessaryto establish .a reasonable level offire, lifesafety, and property protection from the hazards created by fire, explosion, and dangerousconditions for occupants and fire fighters.State andcouhty fire codes address issues such as fire apparatus access roads, fire protectionwater supply, flammable liquids, gas tank storage, and fire alarm systems. These criticalrequirements directly relate to life safety and property protection and should be addressed byfire service members who have subject matter expertise and experience in administering andenforcing the fire code. The safety of citizens in .commercia.! and residential buildings and thefire fighters who respond to fire incidents may be jeopardized bY'a SBCC membership Withlimited fire protection background and expertise and who may amend or veto any provision inthe proposed fire code.We oppose the proposed new members of the SBCC, which removes all but one votinggovernment re.gulation member: the SFC. The proposal to designate the four county buildingofficials to nonvoting status creates a grossly imbalanced SBCC membership to private interests

The Honorable WiilEspero, ChairPage 2March 19, 2012that are not motivated by public safetY and health. National building and fire code committeesthat review and amend codes are COi1'1prised of building life safety regulators, private designers,and industry representatives. These national building and fire code committees balance lifesafety and health, cost/benefits, and the latest technological improvements. In addition, buildingand fire service county representation on the SBCC ensures a successful county building amifire code adoption process.We oppose the. replacement of all county and state building cocjes, ordinances, and regulationsin existence on October 1, 2012, by the 2012 International Building C.ode, which is proposed inSection 107.25. Not only would this usurp the county's authority to administer and permit newbuilding construction, it would als.o eliminate th.e collection bf codes relating to the health andsafety of the built environment, including electrical, plumbing,. residential, energy efficiency,elevator, etc. This proposal reveals a lack of understanding of how building codes areinterrelated and work together for safety and healt!!.Currently, Section 107 28 of the HRS allows each county to amend the state building code(SBC) as it applies to their jurisdiction without the SBCC's approval. These amendmentspertain to the administration and permitting of local codes and conditions,. and We believe thisshould continue. If a county creates an amendment that makes the SBC less restrictive, finalapproval shouldoriginate from the SBCC. Recent responses to our inquiry on this issu.e werethat most stales only allow stricter' code amendments by a county or local jurisdiction, unlessapproval is granted by the state building authority to allow less stringent requirements. Theproposed b.ill does not reflect this concept, arid the first paragraph of Section 107"24 actuallyprohibits stricter amendments.We oppose exempting the state from its.ownSBC requirem,ents and question the merits of saidrequirements as it pertains to building and occupant safety and health, especially when the statewould not have to meet those requirements. State projects should meet minimum building codestandards as required of the counties and private developers. We believe there aregovernmental and private liability issues for buildings that do not meet county, state, or nationalminimum standards.The SFC and the HFD urge your committee's deferral on the passage of H.B. 2358, H.D. 3.Should you have any questions, please contact SFC Administrator Socrates Bratakos at723-7151 orsbratakos@honolulu.gov. dKENNETH G. SILVAChairKGS/LR:cn

TESTIMONY ON HOUSE BILL 2358 HD 3A BILL RELATING TO THE BUILDING CODEPRESENTATION TO THESENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY, GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, ANDMILITARY AFFAIRSMarch 20,2012, 3:20pm in Room 224By Michael P. Hamnett300 Wai Nani Way, 714Honolulu, Hawaii 96744Phone: (808) 292-2838SUBJECT: Testimony Opposed to HB2358 HD3Chair Espero, Vice Chair Kidani and Members of the Committee:My name is Michael Hamnett. I am Executive Director of the Research Corporation ofthe University of Hawaii and a research faculty member at the University of Hawaii. Ihave worked in the field of disaster preparedness and mitigation for the past 33 years.have chaired the Statewide Hazard Mitigation Forum since 1998 and I currently sit onthe Hawaii Hurricane Relief Fund Board of Directors. However, I am testifying as aprivate citizen, albeit one with considerable professional experience related to thesubstance of HB2358 HD3.I strongly oppose House Bill 2358 House Draft 3 as written because the proposed

ADJUTANT GEf\ERAL March 20, 2012 Chair Espero, Vice Chair Kidani, Committee Members: I am Major General Darryll Wong, Adjutant General for the State of Hawaii and Director of Civil Defense, and I am testifying in CH'a ITION to HB 2358 HD3. HB 2358 HD3 proposes many changes to the Hawaii state building code that will threatens the

Related Documents:

5 GA-B85M-HD3 R4 motherboard 5 Motherboard driver disk 5 Two SATA cables 5 User's Manual 5 I/O Shield KB_MS_USB CPU_FAN SYS_FAN LGA1150 ATX GA-B85M-HD3 R4 F_AUDIO AUDIO M_BIOS DDR3_1 DDR3_2 BAT ATX_12V_2X4 Intel B85 R_USB30 CODEC CLR_CMOS B_BIOS DVI VGA LPT USB_LAN PCIEX16 PCIEX1_1 PCIEX

Check the12v adaptor cord is firmly connected Check all extension cords Check for external damage to the adaptor and using a multimeter check the adaptor output is at least 11 volts Check the On/Off switch and wiring to it Check wiring generally for breaks or chew marks Check the

- ALESIS ADAT XT 8 pistes numérique VHS 60 mn 60 - YAMAHA D24 DD 8 pistes 24 bits 96 kHz 60 - TASCAM MX 2424 DD 24 pistes 24 bits 48k/96k 150 - TASCAM MX 2424 interface analogique 180 - PROTOOLS 6.4 Mac G4 interface DIGI 001 90 - PROTOOLS HD3 Mac G5 interface 192 37

gigabyte ga-f2a78m-hd2 ddr3,dvi,hdmi,7ch,glan 2,705 2,789 asus a68hm-k fm2 ,ddr3,vga,dvi,rgb,glan,8ch,m-atx 2,275 2,345 a v e r a g e srpa v e r a g e intel core i3 4170 3.7ghz lga1150 5,250 5,412 gigabyte ga-b85m-hd3-a lga1150/ddr3/dvi/hdmi 3,350 3,454 intel core i3 6098p 3.60 ghz lga 1151 skylake 5,050 5,206 gigabyte ga-b85m-gaming

gigabyte ga-f2a78m-hd2 ddr3,dvi,hdmi,7ch,glan 2,675 2,758 asus a68hm-k fm2 ,ddr3,vga,dvi,rgb,glan,8ch,m-atx 2,275 2,345 a v e r a g e srpa v e r a g e intel core i3 4170 3.7ghz lga1150 5,250 5,412 gigabyte ga-b85m-hd3-a lga1150/ddr3/dvi/hdmi 3,350 3,454 intel core i3 6098p 3.60 ghz lga 1151 skylake 5,050 5,206 gigabyte ga-b85m-gaming 3,1150 .

Gigabyte GA-B85-HD3 : CPU . Core i5 4670 3.40 GHz : Chipset . Intel Haswell : RAM . For tables 1, 3, 5: DDR3 1333 4 GB x 2 : For tables 2, 4, 5: DDR3 1333 2 GB x 2 . VGA : Intel HD Graphics 4600 . Test Computer 3 . OS . Windows 7 : 64

gIgAbytE gA-b85m-hD3 Unterstützt die 4. Generation von Intel Core Prozessoren Intel B85 Express Chipsatz 2x DDR3 DIMM-Steckplätze unterstützen bis zu 16 GB Arbeitsspeicher Micro-ATX Formfaktor VGA-, HDMI- und DVI-D-Anschluss 12x USB-Anschlussmöglichkeiten, davon 2

Advanced Engineering Mathematics 6. Laplace transforms 21 Ex.8. Advanced Engineering Mathematics 6. Laplace transforms 22 Shifted data problem an initial value problem with initial conditions refer to some later constant instead of t 0. For example, y” ay‘ by r(t), y(t1) k1, y‘(t1) k2. Ex.9. step 1.