WSR 22-02-040

PROPOSED RULES

BUILDING CODE COUNCIL

[Filed December 30, 2021, 10:05 a.m.]

Original Notice.

Preproposal statement of inquiry was filed as WSR 21-07-134.

Title of Rule and Other Identifying Information: Chapter 51-50 WAC, Adoption and amendment of the 2021 International Building Code (IBC).

Hearing Location(s): On February 11, 2022, at 10:00 [a.m.], and March 11, 2022, at 10:00 [a.m.] virtual meeting - Zoom. In response to the governor's emergency proclamation there will not be a physical location. Please access the meeting via Zoom or conference phone provided in the agenda.

Date of Intended Adoption: April 15, 2022.

Submit Written Comments to: State Building Code Council (SBCC), 1500 Jefferson Street S.E., Olympia, WA 98504, email sbcc@des.wa.gov, by March 4, 2022.

Assistance for Persons with Disabilities: Contact Annette Haworth, phone 360-407-3255, email sbcc@des.wa.gov, by February 4, 2022.

Purpose of the Proposal and Its Anticipated Effects, Including Any Changes in Existing Rules: The proposed rule adopts the 2021 edition of IBC, published by the International Code Council (ICC), with state amendments to incorporate proposed changes as adopted by SBCC. The rules will provide increased clarity and life safety measures for building construction in Washington state.

2021 IBC Amendments to Chapter 51-50 WAC

Reasons Supporting Proposal: RCW 19.27.031, 19.27.074, and 19.27.540.

Statutory Authority for Adoption: RCW 19.27.031, 19.27.074, and 19.27.540.

Statute Being Implemented: RCW 19.27.031, 19.27.074, and 19.27.540.

Rule is not necessitated by federal law, federal or state court decision.

Name of Proponent: SBCC, governmental.

Name of Agency Personnel Responsible for Drafting and Implementation: Stoyan Bumbalov, 1500 Jefferson Street S.E., Olympia, WA 98504, 360-407-9277; and Enforcement: Local jurisdictions having authority.

A school district fiscal impact statement is not required under RCW 28A.305.135.

A cost-benefit analysis is required under RCW 34.05.328. A preliminary cost-benefit analysis may be obtained by contacting Stoyan Bumbalov, 1500 Jefferson Street S.E., Olympia, WA 98504, phone 360-407-9277, email sbcc@des.wa.gov.

This rule proposal, or portions of the proposal, is exempt from requirements of the Regulatory Fairness Act because the proposal:

Is exempt under RCW 19.85.025(3) as the rules are adopting or incorporating by reference without material change federal statutes or regulations, Washington state statutes, rules of other Washington state agencies, shoreline master programs other than those programs governing shorelines of statewide significance, or, as referenced by Washington state law, national consensus codes that generally establish industry standards, if the material adopted or incorporated regulates the same subject matter and conduct as the adopting or incorporating rule; and rule content is explicitly and specifically dictated by statute.

The proposed rule does impose more-than-minor costs on businesses. There are costs imposed by the proposed rule, but the costs do not fall disproportionately on small businesses. The rule will not affect the distribution of impacted work, whether by small businesses or not, doing the work. The rule does not affect employment, reporting or record keeping.

Small Business Economic Impact Statement

Description: SBCC is filing a proposed rule to adopt the 2021 edition of the International Building Code (IBC), nonstructural provisions (chapter 51-50 WAC). Since 1985, SBCC has been responsible to update to new editions of the building code per RCW 19.27.074. IBC is updated every three years by the ICC. The code development process conducted by the model code organization is open to all interest groups within the design and construction industry and from governmental organizations. See www.iccsafe.org for more information about the model code development process.

The administrative compliance requirements are under the authority of the local governments (RCW 19.27.050). Enforcement activities, including permit issuance, plan review/approval, and inspections occur at the local level. Requirements for construction documents submittal and other reporting mandates are determined by the local jurisdiction and are consistent with previously established policies. The proposed amendments to chapter 51-50 WAC include specific technical requirements for building construction to be consistent with national standards.

Professional Services: Washington has had a statewide building code in effect since 1974. The local enforcement authority having jurisdiction administers the codes through the building and/or fire departments. Administrative procedures for state building code compliance are established and will not be changed by the adoption of the 2021 building codes. Small businesses will employ the same types of professional services for the design and construction of buildings and systems to comply with the state building code. The proposed rule updates the state building code and does not require additional equipment, supplies, labor, or other services. Services needed to comply with the building code are existing within the construction industry as required by the local authority having jurisdiction.

Exemptions: There are 26 significant changes to the model code with economic impact. However, the model code changes are exempt under RCW 19.85.025(3) and 34.05.310 (4)(c), and are not part of this report.

Section 429 related to electric vehicle charging infrastructure is a statutory mandate pursuant to HB 1287 (2021). This section is exempt under RCW 19.85.025(3) and 34.05.310 (4)(e), and is not part of this report.

Costs of Compliance for Businesses: SBCC is required to adopt and maintain the state building code, as provided in chapters 19.27, 19.27A, and 70.92 RCW, and the state legislature. The primary objective of SBCC is to encourage consistency in the building code throughout the state of Washington and to maintain the building code consistent with the state's interest as provided in RCW 19.27.020. An objective of statewide adoption is to minimize state amendments to the model codes. SBCC accepts statewide code amendment proposal from stakeholders to amend IBC to meet the legislative goals. The statewide code adoption process is defined in chapter 51-04 WAC and SBCC bylaws. All proposals must be submitted in writing on the appropriate form with the indicated supporting documentation. Each proponent must identify where a proposed amendment has an economic impact, and estimate the costs and savings of the proposal on construction practices, users and/or the public, the enforcement community, and operation and maintenance.

The cost of compliance incurred by Washington businesses includes training and educational materials. The new 2021 IBC, 2021 IBC Significant changes and 2021 IBC Study pack cost $215 + tax, shipping, and handling. 2021 IBC is also available online at https://shop.iccsafe.org.

For the 2021 code adoption cycle, SBCC received 33 proposals. IBC TAG recommended approval of 28 proposals as submitted or as modified. Nine proposals were identified by TAG as having a cost (increase or decrease) for compliance on businesses. SBCC recommended filing the proposed rule to allow input through the public hearing process.

1. Section 903.3.1.2 (21-GP1-021): Undoes a change that was made to the 2021 IFC and IBC (FS117-18), returning the language in the section to the 2018 text, and aligns the code with the scoping provisions of NFPA 13R. The 2021 change unnecessarily limits the applicability of NFPA 13R systems, particularly for podium buildings, triggering a requirement for a full NFPA 13 system in more buildings. If adopted by SBCC, the 2021 IFC/IBC requirement would decrease affordability for residential construction, since a full NFPA 13 system would be required in shorter buildings. The new proposal will decrease construction cost.

According to a November 2020 article on the National Fire Sprinkler Association website:

• The National Multifamily Housing Council members estimate a NFPA 13 system costs "an average of $1 to $2 more per square foot than NFPA 13R."

• "NFPA Journal notes that installing an NFPA 13 system can cost four to six times more than an NFPA 13R system and include a four to six times greater construction turnaround time."

2. Section 202, new definition for high-rise building (21-GP1-036): This change will address a lack of clarity in the code where it is difficult to determine if an occupied roof is considered a floor. Adding an occupied roof with an occupant load of 50 or more to the definition removes ambiguity. This definition will place some buildings into the high-rise category, which will require additional life-safety systems to be installed that otherwise would not have been required. The proponent establishes that additional costs for these systems could be anywhere between $100,000 to $1,000,000 per project, depending on the size of the project.

Nevertheless, SBCC staff research determined that this cost will not be applicable to all projects. Determining what qualifies as a high-rise building is a fairly unique measurement of height that is not based on the definition of "building height." The critical measurement is from the lowest ground location where a fire department will be able to set its firefighting equipment to a floor level of occupied floors. The term "occupied floor" is not defined in IBC, and as it is stated in this proposal, the requirements for high-rise buildings are enforced differently throughout the state. Some jurisdictions are considering an occupied roof equivalent to an occupied floor; others do not include it into the height measurement. Therefore, SBCC staff considers this proposal clarifies the application of the code, and is needed for consistency with enforcement. There is no statewide direct cost associated with its adoption.

3. Sections IBC 903.2.1.3, Chapter 10 (various sections) and 3116 (21-GP1-66; 21-GP1-67): The code proposals are addressing fixed guideway and passenger rail systems. Proposal #21-GP1-67 is intended to correlate IBC/IFC requirements for fire protection to NFPA 130 requirements. The primary purpose is to clarify the requirements for fire protection at open stations. IBC Chapter 9 requires fire protection in Group A3 occupancies and levels from the Group A3 occupancy to the level of exit discharge. However, for open stations, NFPA 130 only requires fire protection in areas with combustible loading. The code and standard are in conflict, but pursuant to Chapter 1 of IBC, the code language prevails. Some jurisdictions have required fire protection at the platform level and at the plaza level while others have not. This code clarification would bring consistency across all jurisdictions and will result in significant decrease in building cost. For justification, the proponent uses an estimate for elevated station in design in North Seattle, which shows a significant decrease in building costs of $225,348. Proposal # 21-GP1-66 is drawn from NFPA 130 amendments by the City of Bellevue and the City of Seattle for means of egress for light rail stations. The intent is to provide clarity for more consistent application of IBC and NFPA 130 in the future as light rail service expands and extends into new jurisdictions. The proposal clarifies conflicts between IBC and NFPA 130; there is no associated cost with the adoption.

4. Sections 420.14 (new), 202, 505.1, 907.2.11.1, 907.2.11.2, 1011.14, 1015.2, 1015.3 (21-GP1-74): Introduces "lofts" into IBC as WA amendment. The concept is taken from Section R327 of IRC, as amended. Lofts have been proposed and used in several jurisdictions for many years in order to put "extra" space to use. However, there is nothing in the code that regulates them. This proposal is intended to provide a reasonable balance between flexibility and safety for these types of spaces. The proponent determined that there will be an increase in construction costs including the cost for one extra smoke alarm and guards for each loft. The additional costs will depend on the size and number of lofts in the dwelling unit. Smoke alarms cost less than $20 each. Based on the price of deck guard systems, the materials for a premanufactured loft guard system will cost between $15 and $40 a linear foot. Installation costs will be in addition to the material costs. Nevertheless, SBCC staff research determined that there will be no additional cost for businesses if this proposal is adopted. Provisions for lofts are already adopted in IRC (Section R327) and used, on occasions, for projects constructed under IBC. Adopting the same or similar requirements in IBC will provide clarity and consistency for enforcement. The provisions originate from the IRC Appendix Q (Tiny Houses), which contains some provisions for "recreational park vehicles" governed by ANSI A119.5. The adoption of Appendix Q was intended to reduce the cost and allow construction of tiny homes, not to create more restrictive (and expensive) requirements. This includes the provisions for lofts, which lessens the incentive to misrepresent an intended use and enables building departments to regulate the health and safety of loft spaces based on their actual intended use, ensuring health and safety with minimum loft dimensions, requirements for access and egress, and proper emergency escape and rescue openings. SBCC staff considers this proposal is needed to provide more affordable housing, to clarify the application of the code, and for consistency with enforcement. There is no direct cost associated with its adoption if applied to the cost of construction as a whole, and not to the lofts only.

5. Section 706.3 and 703.4 (21-GP1-80): Type III and IV buildings are required to have fire walls made of approved noncombustible materials. Limiting the makeup of fire walls to noncombustible materials can result in problems for taller III and IV buildings. According to the proponent, this change would do away with differential settlement issues making damage to the noncombustible fire wall due to shrinkage of the wood bearing walls less of a factor. The costs associated with this change, as presented by the proponent, would decrease building costs depending on material prices.

6. Section 510.2 (21-GP1-82): This proposal eliminates the Group A 299 occupant load limitation to allow overall provisions found in IBC to dictate the design of the Group A building or building with a Group A occupancy constructed over the horizontal assembly. If accepted, this code change will reduce the cost of construction as buildings above a podium building will have a broader choice of types of construction. The cost will depend on the size/type of projects.

7. Sections 1208.3 (new), 1208.4, 1208.5 (21-GP1-84): Standardizes the minimum size requirements for all dwelling units. The code, as currently written, can be interpreted to allow a one-bedroom unit to be smaller than an efficiency dwelling unit (EDU). The proposal makes it clear that a dwelling unit and efficiency dwelling unit are subject to the same size limitations. It also clarifies that sleeping units are subject to the same minimum size requirements as habitable rooms in dwelling units. This proposal, if adopted, would decrease the cost of developing a one-bedroom unit because it will not be treated differently from an EDU with respect to size. Since the cost depends on the type, size, and location of the project, no cost values are provided by the proponent.

8. Sections 602.4.2.2.2, 602.4.2.2.4 (21-GP1-87): The proposed increase of allowable unprotected area on the ceiling from 20 percent to 100 percent is consistent with the recently completed research conducted at RISE. These fire tests demonstrated that the proposed amounts of unprotected areas on the ceiling and walls, as a function of floor area, can be safely implemented while still achieving the performance objectives specified by ICC Tall Wood Building Ad-Hoc Committee in the development of the tall building mass timber provisions in the 2021 I-codes. The proposal, if adopted, would decrease the cost of construction because it reduces the required amount of noncombustible protection on walls and ceilings in Type IV-B Construction. Since the cost depends on the type, size, and location of the project, no cost values are provided by the proponent.

9. Sections 503.1.4.2, 1015.2 (21-GP1-145): The new amendment requires guards to be provided at the perimeter of the occupied portions of an occupied roof and provides two exceptions (Exception 9 and Exception 10). In addition, the new amendment provides a reference to Section 420.14 pertaining to lofts. Pursuant to the proponent, there are many cases where the design of an occupied roof includes only a portion of the entire roof area. The occupied portions of the roof are typically elevated 18 inches or less above the adjacent unoccupied areas of the roof; therefore, no guard is currently required for these areas. This issue is regularly debated due to the lack of regulatory authority to require the guard in this design scenario. The proposed code change eliminates or drastically reduces the potential for kids and adults who may be inebriated, from falling over the edge of a roof. There will be an increase in cost because more guards will need to be installed for occupied roofs where only a portion of the roof area is occupied. The proponent estimates the cost to be approximately $1/SF of the occupied area of the roof.

Loss of Sales or Revenue: The proposed rules make the state code for building construction consistent with national standards. Businesses with new products or updated test or design standards are recognized in the updated building code. The update will result in some cost outlay for some small businesses for specific building projects, for a transition period. Other small businesses would see an increase in revenue. The amendments to the building codes affect over 25,000 small businesses in the state, where construction activity occurs. The primary intent of the amendments is to improve the safety features in buildings and provide consistency and fairness across the state, for a predictable business environment. The amendments should result in enhanced safety and value in buildings.

Cost of Compliance for Small Businesses: (Determine whether the proposed rule will have a disproportionate cost impact on small businesses, compare the cost of compliance for small business with the cost of compliance for the 10 percent of businesses that are the largest businesses.) Most businesses affected by the updates to the building codes are small businesses; over 95 percent of those listed in the construction and related industries have under 50 employees. The costs per employee are comparable between the largest businesses and the majority of small businesses. The cost to comply with the updated codes is not a disproportionate impact on small businesses. Where SBCC found the cost of compliance for small businesses to be disproportionate, the proposed rule mitigates the cost. The proposed rules include a definition of small business and provide exceptions for compliance with the updated rule.

Small Businesses Involved in the Development of the Rule: For IBC, SBCC conducted 23 open public meetings of the building code technical advisory group, available via telephone conference bridge and over the internet, and allowed comment on every item on every agenda. SBCC appointed over 100 representatives of all segments of the business and construction community to serve on the technical advisory groups.

List of Industries: Below is a list of industries required to comply with the building code:

Estimate of the Number of Jobs That Will Be Created or Lost: The adoption of the latest code edition is not expected to significantly impact the number of jobs in the construction industry. These rules are likely to be job neutral overall; i.e., they will not result in any job gains or losses. The scheduled effective date of the new edition is July 1, 2021. Building permits issued prior to that date will be vested under the 2018 building code. Permits issued for projects under the 2021 code edition will generally start with the 2024 construction season.

A copy of the statement may be obtained by contacting Stoyan Bumbalov, 1500 Jefferson Street S.E., Olympia, WA 98504, phone 360-407-9277, email stoyan.bumbalov@des.wa.gov.

December 30, 2021

Andrew S. Klein

Council Chair

OTS-3404.3