Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default ICC Code Hearings, Rochester 2007

    Is anyone from here attending the ICC Code Hearings in Rochester? There are some important fire safety items for the 2009 code up for voting.

    (Most notably, RB114 -- a change to the IRC that would require automatic sprinklers in new one & two family dwellings)
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.


  2. #2
    Forum Member FWDbuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Pee-Ayy!
    Posts
    7,395

    Default

    Deputy- Have you ever heard of the ICC having provisions for absentee voting? I have been asking around and no one seems to know. I had originally planned on attending specifically to vote for that bill (The HBA's be damned!) but due to my wife recently being in the hospital, I chewed through a big chunk of my vacation leave.

    I should call the ICC on Monday and see if they do- kinda doubt it though, I am sure logistically they are not prepared for that. Not to mention the fact that the HBA's would scream about it if they lost.

    But even if we did get it through the IRC, I am sure the Rocket Scientists in Harrisburg would screw it up through legislation (with the help of lobbyists from HBA's), much like they threw hard wired SD's and basement egress to the wind with act 92.


    -Member, ICC
    Code Enforcement Official/Building Inspector
    Last edited by FWDbuff; 05-12-2007 at 07:25 AM.
    "Loyalty Above all Else. Except Honor."

  3. #3
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FWDbuff View Post
    Deputy- Have you ever heard of the ICC having provisions for absentee voting?
    They're testing a computer based system which -- I presume -- will provide the ability to vote remotely in the future. Frankly, this is my first brush with voting under the ICC so i'm still learning the process.

    Quote Originally Posted by FWDbuff View Post
    But even if we did get it through the IRC, I am sure the Rocket Scientists in Harrisburg would screw it up
    Local amendments will undoubtedly be a big hurdle everywhere even if the requirement passes into the model code but, IMHO, we all stand a better chance of keeping a requirement locally that appears in a model code than adding one that doesn't.

    There's not much info, but here's the webpage where remote voting is mentioned: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/codes/remote-rochester.html
    Last edited by DeputyMarshal; 05-12-2007 at 07:55 AM.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  4. #4
    Forum Member FWDbuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Pee-Ayy!
    Posts
    7,395

    Default

    I'm hearing that the sprinklers got shot down......anyone else have any info????
    "Loyalty Above all Else. Except Honor."

  5. #5
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FWDbuff View Post
    I'm hearing that the sprinklers got shot down......anyone else have any info????
    That's correct.

    The majority voted to add a requirement for residential sprinklers to the 2009 IRC but failed to reach the supermajority (2/3rds) needed for it to pass into the code.

    IMHO, this is largely the result of a lot of misconceptions and, quite frankly, ignorance about sprinklers, how they work, and what design alternatives are available out there. As fast as the pro-sprinkler lobbies (led by the IAFC) try to educate the public (including building officials), the anti-sprinkler lobbies (led by the National Association of Home Builders) spread more myths and half-truths against them.

    IOW, it's dirty politics at its best.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. WOF Report: 12-06-05 (Part I)
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-11-2005, 12:04 AM
  2. No more using of 10 codes, by order of the feds?
    By arhaney in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 272
    Last Post: 09-05-2005, 01:38 AM
  3. Code Development/NFPA/Sprinkers
    By neiowa in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-16-2005, 02:22 PM
  4. World Of Fire Report: 03-13-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-14-2005, 10:01 PM
  5. World Of Fire Report: 01-30-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-31-2005, 08:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts