Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Federal Gov't Building Design

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Scott,

I don't believe that I specifically said that any federal stuff was not
regulated by a code, just that local building codes don't apply UNLESS the
federal government decides that they will "let" them apply.  Most federal
projects that I am aware of do require following some sort of code
provisions...it is just that the federal government can determine what
that code is.  Usually, the requirements are a fairly recent code and many
times they do use what is used locally (if I recall correctly we used what
was used locally for the VA hospital that I worked on, but I could be
remembering wrong...regardless, we did have to follow the provisions of a
reasonably recent model building code).

Beyond that I do know that the NEHRP is referred to in an executive order
as a minimum level of "requirements" for seismic design.  I admit that I
don't know to what extent that executive order applies (i.e. is it all
federal projects or just ones that go through the GSA).

The one possible exception is if the building is built by developer, etc.
and then leased to the feds.  In that case, I believe that it must meet
the feds requirements AND the local building codes (basically, which ever
is stricter).

Hope that clarifies.

Scott
Ypsilanti, MI


On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Haan Scott M DPW CIVIL ENGR(n) wrote:

> Scott:
>
> Actually not all federal stuff is the not regulated by a code.  DOD
> buildings fall under the provisions of the Unified Facilities Criteria UFC
> 1-200-01 31 July 2002 and UFC 3-310-01 30 June 2000.  These specifically
> adopt the International Building Code with a few local amendments. The Under
> Secretary of Defense wrote a memo in 29 May 2002 that says all the UFC are
> to be used by all military departments for planning, design, construction,
> sustainment, restoration and modernization.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Scott Haan, P.E.
> DPW Ft Richardson, AK
> phone: 907-384-3161
> fax: 907-384-3051
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Maxwell [mailto:smaxwell(--nospam--at)engin.umich.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 7:52 AM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: Re: Federal Gov't Building Design
>
> Brian,
>
> Your best bet is to ask the agency through which work is being procured.
> Federal buildings don't have to per the local building code unless the
> federal government decides that they WANT to follow the local building
> code.  The thing that complicates things if the NEHRP provisions.  The
> NEHRP provisions essentially have two roles...one is a national seismic
> standard that can then be used as a potential basis for model building
> code, but it still needs to be adjusted since it is not written in
> mandatory (code) language.  Thus, as it works now, the NEHRP is taken by
> ASCE 7 and "codified".  The second role is to be a minimum design criteria
> for federal projects (by some executive order).  Thus, it is entirely
> possible that you may be required to use the NEHRP provisions as you
> minimum criteria for seismic design on a federal project.  Basically, as I
> understand it, all federal projects must now be designed under a code that
> at least matches the NEHRP provisions.
>
> So, the end result is that the RFP should spell that you for you (it did
> when I did seismic evaluations of existing federal buildings for the GSA).
> If not, then contact the procuring agency.
>
> HTH,
>
> Scott
> Ypsilanti, MI
>
>
> On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, brian stanley wrote:
>
> > List-
> >
> > What exactly are the seismic standards for buildings designed to be owned
> or
> > leased by the federal government?  The local building code is IBC 2000,
> > which, from what I understand, adopted the seismic provisions from the
> NEHRP
> > "Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations" 1997.  I noticed that
> there
> > is a 2000 version of NEHRP "Recommended Provisions for Seismic
> Regulations".
> > Does this mean that a new building should be designed for seismic
> provisions
> > greater than IBC 2000?  Does anyone know where I get info on the
> differences
> > between the 1997 and the 2000 versions.  The RFP for which we are
> designing
> > mentions NISTIR 5382 Standards of Seismic Safety for Existing Federally
> > Owned and Leaser Buildings.  After a review of this document, I don't see
> > anything that changes the design procedure or detailing which would be
> done
> > for IBC 2000.  Has anyone read this document and found otherwise?
> >
> > Brian Stanley, P.E.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> *   site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********