Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

IBC adoption process (was SDM Vol 2)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 7/29/2000 12:39:30 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
Mark.Swingle(--nospam--at) writes:

<< I think it is time that the members of SEAOC demand that their leaders 
 the CA State legislature to change the law so that amendments and
 corrections such as this can be made to the CA version of the UBC.  If it is
 a bad law, it should be changed ASAP, particularly if it was a simple
 procedural error.  From what I understand, it is nearly impossible for the
 language of the UBC to be changed once the CA version is published.  It is
 nearly always adopted as is (except of course for schools and hospitals).
 From what I understand, the 2000 IBC is a done deal (no further revisions)
 and the 2003 IBC nearly so.


There is still a chance to make changes to the 2000 IBC. According to the 
current state schedule for the adoption of IBC, interested parties have until 
January of 2001 to submit code change proposals to the California Building 
Standards Commission. Anyone can submit code change proposals. As I 
understand SEAOC has already submitted some changes. (Maybe someone from the 
SEAOC code committee should shed some light on this.) 

The thing that throws a monkey ranch in the whole process is the strong 
opposition of some vocal groups to the IBC and the parallel process of 
creation of a new building code by the NFPA (national Fire Protection 
Association). The picture of the next cycle of code adoption looks very 
convoluted at this time. In one scenario we may be stuck with 97 UBC for 
several more years.

But I would encourage everyone who has a bone to pick with an item in the 
UBC, that was carried over to the IBC, to consider submitting a change 
proposal. We need to take action otherwise decisions will be made for us.

Ben Yousefi, SE
San Jose, CA

--- End Message ---