-
Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades
Reelection to the ICC Board of Directors
- Thread starter jpranch
- Start date
conarb
Registered User
JP Ranch said:
Jim:
Can you tell us a little about the energy code hearings?
jpranch
Platinum Member
Conarb, it has been my experience that, that particular code takes a long, long, long, etc... time to get through at the code hearings. I have set through the whole thing in the past. Here is where it gets dangerous for me but I have to say it straight, don’t know any other way so here I go with the softball version. The U.S. department of energy in my humble opinion has way to much to say about the content. I would also say that there should be another federal department more involved. That would be the Consumer Product Safety Commission. (CPSC) Someone correct me if I’m wrong but as I understand it the CPSC set the standards for energy efficiency for consumer appliances. Here is one part that I still do not understand? Why in the hell are there still low efficiency furnaces, air conditioners, refrigerators, and other appliances as well as electronic energy pigs like flat screen TV’S on the market? Hells bells! 90 percent plus furnaces have been available for how many years / decades? FYI, Wyoming dose not and will not in the near future adopt a state wide energy code. It’s up to the local jurisdictions. Here in Gillette we have a local energy code based on the 2006 IECC. That will not change for a least the next 3 to 4 years. conarb, I sense that you have a few specific questions? I have never know you to be shy so let’er buck.
conarb
Registered User
Jim:
My concern is the influence of any government agencies on the ICC, the federal government has no constitutional right to tell me or anyone else how much energy we can consume, the ICC is an NGO and is supposed to be independent of the federal government, how many other government agencies are influencing codes? How far are they influencing, as far as demanding specfic agenda? So long as only government employees can vote aren't we always going to have government codes?
Has any acknowledgement been made to the fact that an administration has been elected with the promise to reduce rules and regulations? is there any movement within the ICC to reduce codes?
jpranch
Platinum Member
All NGO’s or SDO’s are impacted by the federal government without exception. Example? Just look at healthcare and NFPA- 101? If you look at the 2018 I-Codes you will see reductions in the cost of construction across the board and I’m not talking that crap about over the life of the building what ever that really means. I’m talking up front before you ever stick a shovel in the ground savings. This is especially true for the INC and IRC. I will say that any organization has to be very careful dealing with the fed’s but one must also realize that you cannot and should not discount them. It is unavoidable. So that leaves you with managing it. Just the reality or nature of the beast. I think for the purposes of the discussion here I will steer clear of constitutional rights and just stick with the codes and content.
jpranch
Platinum Member
IBC and IRC! Darn it! Sorry for the typo.
tmurray
SAWHORSE
Are these two statements not mutually exclusive? How can the organization be independent of the government, yet tied to election platform of who gets elected?
I'm assuming ICC is making energy codes with the US Dept of Energy pointing a gun at its head saying if you don't we will. I would think you would be happy with the approach ICC is taking to energy codes vs. what the feds would do. ADA anyone?
conarb
Registered User
Jim:
It's good to hear that the latest codes are reducing costs, tell us what actually happens, do the Feds actually come into hearings and demand their agenda? Do you fight back? How can we as citizens fight back on code issues? It's become apparent that no matter who we elect the same "Deep State" government employees stay in from administration to administration, I'd like to be able to fire every government employee with every change in administration but since FDR that's impossible, what can we do to effect change? I'd like to get codes back to minimum health and safety standards and away from taking people's freedoms away.
jpranch
Platinum Member
tmurray is on target. The fed's will say right in the hearing room that if this does not go the way we want it to then we will not "certify" the latest edition of the IECC. By certify it is my understanding that they mean that the latest edition is more energy efficient than the previous edition. The best way to bring about change is to engage in the code development process. The place to start is to know the process or as I like to call it "The Rules of Engagement". That would be CP-28. Here is the link: https://www.iccsafe.org/icc-bylaws-and-council-policies/
Mr. Inspector
SAWHORSE
Even us inspectors that work for the government?
For government jobs how would they get anyone with experience?
Don't forget the military are government employees.
No one would want to work knowing they would be fired in a few years.
Would the government need to hire new people that do the hiring every 4 years?
The government would run out of citizens as new employees in a few administrations.
There were 21,995,000 employed by federal, state and local government in the United States
the federal government now employs 2,711,000people (excluding non-civilian military).
conarb
Registered User
Jim:
As you know it's my position that it's none of the government's business how much energy a citizen consumes, some drive Lamborghinis and others Priim (or Priuses), when the government starts telling us what we can or cannot drive it's tyranny and time to dissolve these 50 states.
As to the IECC why can't the ICC tell the feds to stuff it, the ICC mission is to create codes for minimum health and safety standards, if the Feds want to control every aspect of people's lives to write their own damn energy codes?
I read an interesting article the other day entitled "Sanctamania".
This picture says it all, we have people like her in government pushing their disability, energy, or other personal agenda, it's time we fight back.
The mirror is an inch too high, what about all the starving African villages?
¹ https://internationalman.com/articles/sanctimania/
conarb,
I think we sent that nut job packin! she's spending time lecturing for a college in the Mountain time zone now. Check with Gonzaga, I think she found safe haven there.
Poor college student just trying to do an interview and then she yells "I need some muscle over here!"
I think we sent that nut job packin! she's spending time lecturing for a college in the Mountain time zone now. Check with Gonzaga, I think she found safe haven there.
Poor college student just trying to do an interview and then she yells "I need some muscle over here!"
tmurray
SAWHORSE
Just think about the costs for the firing and hiring process alone. Let alone the challenges for re training an entire workforce every 4 years... This is an HR nightmare.
JCraver
Sawhorse
Right.
To his point though - Be honest with yourselves, and I bet every one of you could ID at least 1 job in your own jurisdiction that doesn't need to be there. Multiply that by every other jurisdiction plus the state's and the fed and it isn't too far-fetched to say that we need to get rid of at least half the current number. "We" waste an insane amount of money on jobs that have no reason to exist.
Sorry for the hijack, Mr. Brown - back to your thread now.
conarb
Registered User
What do we do when we have a government loaded with corruption? WIth a change in administration I intended to take our ADA forum to the new Justice Department showing them that the regulatons are so bad, and/or badly written, that we need all new regulations, come to find out the Justice Department is loaded with corruption from career employees. it's not just me, I had a neighbor who had been a career FBI employee, he was beside himself when Comey ticked off Hilarys' crimes then refused to prosecute, he was so upset he died a couple of years ago, 8 years younger than I, he was distraught that his whole life's work was impuned by corruption at the top of the Justice Department. I don't know how any of you guys can even work for the government, I've known two inspectors quit rather than put up with what codes are requiring,
jpranch
Platinum Member
conarb, I work for local government. I love this jurisdiction! Best darn people in the world! I guess that I just got lucky.
conarb
Registered User
Jim:
Returning to this post, what can we do to get the Feds out of the hearing rooms? Our member Roger P, a builder, regularily attends hearings so he's much more qualified than I, I've asked him chime in, but it seems to me that back in the ICBO days codes were pretty much free of government influence. If the government is going to tell you what to do why even have an ICC?
jpranch
Platinum Member
The IECC is really the exception and not the rule. All the other I-Codes do not see the level of activity from the fed's that the energy code seems to draw. They certainly can participate in the process but at the end of the day only voting members make the decisions. I did not indicate that they run the show and If I did my bad. The last thing anybody needs is the fed's actually writing and publishing any codes or standards. Again the key is participation in the process by voting members.
jpranch
Platinum Member
I would certainly at lease give it a chance and take a good look at it to see if this is something that your jurisdiction might want. A lot of jurisdictions throughout the country have been keeping current with the IECC and seem to be getting along alright. One of the reasons the State of Wyoming has not adopted it was the threat that was made by the U.S. DOE. They made a treat that the states must adopt the most current edition of the IECC by 2017 or else. They tied it to training money and said if you took the money you had to adopt. Our Governor called their bluff and to my knowledge nothing happened as predicted. It was an empty threat.
fatboy
Administrator
"I did not indicate that they run the show and If I did my bad. The last thing anybody needs is the fed's actually writing and publishing any codes or standards. Again the key is participation in the process by voting members."
They might not be now, but that was the out-and-out threat that they said out loud in MN, the first big go-round for the IECC.
"You all better be improving this code, or the DOE will just write it, and force adoption." Might not be word for word, but pretty dang close.
They might not be now, but that was the out-and-out threat that they said out loud in MN, the first big go-round for the IECC.
"You all better be improving this code, or the DOE will just write it, and force adoption." Might not be word for word, but pretty dang close.
Last edited:
conarb
Registered User
We should fight that any way we can, the government at any level has no right to take our freedoms away, and that includes how much energy we use.
conarb
Registered User
So Jim, as I understand the Feds come into the rooms and tell you guys what to do, in effect you just write codes that rubber stamp what the Feds want?