Kathryn's Memo

Topic: Green building and the implications for fire/building code compliance

Information gathered so far:
-relevant chapters from PlaNYC
-journal articles
-news articles
-press releases
-contact information for some relevant sources

Thoughts upon gathering this information:
-There's quite a bit of information out there on the implications of integrating Green LEED standards with building codes.
-Some quick facts:

-LOCAL LAW 86: NYC has required that all development (that fits within certain guidelines) must achieve LEED certification.
-The Freedom Tower is planned to be a Gold Standard LEED building

-There is discussion as to whether straw-based installation (which is considered extremely environmentally friendly) can meet building/fire safety codes

-Lucrative tax credits are offered to compensate builders for going green

-The use of recycled construction material is widespread

-Take a look at Executive Order 111 -- enacted by Pataki

-Following LEED standards may actually increase the safety of buildings (ie: in the event of a biological attack, rooms with certain air pressure requirements may be less affected)

-Going green may reduce losses in the event of a natural disaster.
-There is also an event, put on by GreenHomeNYC, which will take a look at how the new building code will address sustainable design. The event is being held on Wednesday, Feb. 20, from 6:30 to 8 p.m. Andrew has kindly offered to go in my place as I will be out of town. (http://www.greenhomenyc.org/events?do=view&event_id=793&PHPSESSID=3a314f2f99fc0ce9f8c51d18bae51fe0)

Questions going forward:
1. What are the implications of building code restrictions on green building strategies?
2. Do green buildings comply with the same codes as other buildings?
3. What are the specific challenges for those who want to build a Silver, Gold, or even Platinum LEED building?
4. Do green buildings supersede code requirements in some areas (ie: air quality)?
5. Are there inspectors which are specifically delegated to green building inspections?
6. What role do tax incentives play in encouraging green building? Does this ever encourage people to cut corners?
7. What are the pros and cons of utilizing straw as an insulator?
8. What specific challenges do New York buildings face (ie: in terms of density)?
9. What are the compliance implications in terms of retrofitting buildings to be LEED certified?
10. What are the challenges of using recycled building materials and meeting code requirements?

Possible Sources:
-Building Safety Journal
-Ecological Building Network
-Sustainlane.com
-Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy
-New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
-NYSERDA
-United States Building Council (LEED certification body)
-New York City Fire Department
-GreenBiz
-National Institute of Standards and Technology, US Department of Commerce

Next steps:
-attend the discussion regarding building code compliance and green building (Andrew to attend on my behalf)…be sure to acquire contact information for follow-up interviews.
-read relevant chapters of PlaNYC
-read Local Law 86
-read the conclusions derived from the post-World Trade Center roundtable
-do some in-depth pre-reporting thinking and then set up some interviews

Scaffolding in the City: 2/14 Memo

The following is the research I've done so far on scaffolding in the city, a subsection that falls under both topics i've chosen; workers and construction.

I've included a section from Andrew's post. My aim is not to be redundant, but to condense the information we do have into a more inclusive, comprehensive text.

So, scaffolding in the city:

2006 -- The Building's Department, OSHA and the Office of Immigrant Affairs convene a Scaffold Worker Safety Task Foce. They found that "speaking English as a second language or speaking a language different than that spoken at the job site was often a factor in fatal construction accidents."
Steps Taken: "Outreach events across the five boroughs to distribute safety information in multiple languages to day laborers and discussed with workers how to stay safe on the job"
Questions: How effective can this outreach program really be? how are day laborers, if they're picked up at a Home Depot to do a day's work, going to access this "safety information" and even if they do get access to it, how does it help them as, possibly, exploited labor?
Tasks at Hand: Get a copy of this "safety information," talk to laborers on job sites to see if they are aware of the safety information, etc.
Contacts: Department of Buildings, Carly Sullivan Jr., day laborers (I speak Spanish and can most likely take care of this. There are several spots that I know where day laborers get hired)

Some Statistics:
from Andrew's posted emails "construction incidents on high-rise construction sites, which comprise union and non-union labor sites, increased 49% over the last year, from 69 in CY 2006 to 103 in CY 2007." DOUBLE CHECK STATISTIC. Just glancing at it, her percentage is wrong, so who knows how correct the rest of the information is.

2006 Census US Department of Labor: 5,703 workplace accident fatalities in 2006, 14% of which were falls. 11% of 809 fatal falls in 2006 (nationwide) occurred from scaffolding.

7 of 25 workers killed in workplace accidents in New York City construction sites between Oct 2001 and Sept 2003 were day laborers (get more up to date stats)
NEW YORK SCAFFOLD LAW:
Section 240 of the Labor Law, it requires contractors and property owners to build or furnish whatever equipment is necessary (for example, scaffolding) to keep workers safe from on-the-job falls. It allows for legal action against the owners of the building, and the contractor. Over the course of the last two decades there have been attempts to repeal this legislation (NY is the only state to have something of its type), and this debate is ongoing. Governor Spitzer has stated his intention to address the issue. There are differing interpretations. Pro-business types, and personal injury attorneys eager to get cases, try to label it as the right to sue even if the fall results from personal negligence on the part of the worker, and that insurance premiums go way up on account of this "outdated" law. Pro-worker types are quick to point out that it is essential protection for workers. The former is seemingly debunked right here.


Accountability of Contractors: taken from Andrew's posted email
"For recent example, you can look at the permits issued for the new building under construction at 525 Clinton Street, the site in Brooklyn where the scaffold worker died last week. A general contractor called Clinton Court Development LLC pulled the permits issued for that job site. When we search our data as it relates to Clinton Court Development LLC, we find only violations and permits issued related to work at 525 Clinton Avenue. It is possible the owners of Clinton Court Development LLC also own corporations that are building developments in other parts of the borough or the city, but there is no way to know for sure. With the infrastructure we have in place today, we cannot holistically track contractors’ performance across job sites and hold them accountable, unless the general contractor retains the same name across job sites.
As the Commissioner said in response to a question at the hearing, it is surprising that in this day and age, of the 29 trades licensed by the Buildings Department, general contractors are not one of them. Requiring a general contractor to register would empower the Buildings Department with a tool to track a contractor’s performance across job sites and hold him accountable for his actions."

Question: Is it possible to track this contractor by the equipment they use, such as the scaffolding they rent? If we could trace them back to previous job sites and look at the incidents that occurred at said sites it could reveal some good stuff.

Follow-Up: I live near Clinton Hill and I'll be taking pictures of the job site as well as asking some questions, maybe looking for serial numbers on the scaffolding equipment as well as the company that rented it to them (usually displayed somewhere on the scaffolding).

Questions on the Topic as a Whole: How will the debate on the scaffold law evolve? how serious is the Department of Buildings about passing an accountability scheme for contractors (is it just lip service)? Get into specifics of the code and see how strictly those specifics are enforced at different job sites. On buildings such as Deutsch Bank, where the work is done at significant elevation and there is no quick form of egress or ingress, how is the scaffolding situation made to account for the condition?

Clearly this is a very preliminary sketch, but we can move forward on the scaffold issue from here, or I can spearhead this since it is only one subsection of the worker / construction issue.

Some updates: construction safety & Triangle Shirtwaist history

Two things.

1) Here are two e-mails I got today and yesterday from the Department of Buildings. Forgive the basic nature of the questions I ask. I actually asked them about a week ago but they've been slow to reply ("Hi! I'm Andrew, from the Washington Square News!"). Included is a link to Patricia Lancaster's testimony in the first graf.

---- email 1, begin ----

In [DoB Comish. Patricia Lancaster's] testimony [on Feb 4th, the topic of the NYT article we read last week], the Commissioner recommends the City pursue three pieces of legislation: 
  
 1) a law for general contractors to be licensed through a
registration requirement, 
  
 2) a law for concrete contractors to be licensed through a
registration requirement, and 
  
3) a law requiring a concrete safety manager to oversee
concrete operations on high-rise construction sites. 
  
The impetus here is the absence of an accountability scheme
amongst the contractors on a job site. 
  
A registration requirement for GCs and concrete contractors
would obviously provide sharper enforcement teeth, as there would be the threat of revoking the registration if contractors are found after to due process to routinely violate or disregard safety rules and regulations. 
The registration requirement would also empower the Department to track contractors’ performance across job sites. Currently, this is nearly impossible to do because a corporation can change its name from
job site to job site. For recent example, you can look at the permits issued for the new building under construction at 525 Clinton Street, the site in Brooklyn where the scaffold worker died last week. A general contractor called Clinton Court Development LLC pulled the permits issued for that job site. When we search our data as it relates to Clinton Court Development LLC, we find only violations and permits issued related to work at 525 Clinton Avenue. It is possible the owners of Clinton Court Development LLC also own corporations that are building developments in other parts of the borough or the city, but there is no way to know for sure. With the infrastructure we have in place today, we cannot holistically track contractors’ performance across job sites and hold them accountable, unless the general contractor retains the same name across job sites. 
  
 As the Commissioner said in response to a question at the
hearing, it is surprising that in this day and age, of the 29 trades licensed by the Buildings Department, general contractors are not one of them. Requiring a general contractor to register would empower the Buildings Department with a tool to track a contractor’s performance across job sites and hold him accountable for his actions. 
 
Carly Sullivan
Assistant Press Secretary
NYC Department of Buildings
T: (212) 566-3473
F: (212) 566-3865
 
www.NYC.gov/buildings

---e-mail 1 ends -----

---e-mail 2 begins ---

Andrew:  See Below.  Let me know if you have any questions.  Thanks.
 
On Background:
  
RE: Who has the DOB consulted in creating this new proposed set of regulations? Labor? Industry? Immigrant groups? Builders who use non-union workers? Other jurisdictions?
  
Please specify which regulations you are referring to.
  
RE: Who has opposed this new set of regulations, and who is for?
  
Please specify which regulations you are referring to.  
  
RE:  Was the DOB planning on making these changes beforehand?
  
Since November, the Buildings Department has been working to devise legislative and non-legislative solutions to address the problem of concrete operations on high-rise construction sites.  On January 23, 2008, Commissioner Lancaster sent a memo to the industry outlining best practices to avoid concrete-related accidents. 
 
RE: Unions say that non-unionized work is to blame for the majority [73%] of accidents during construction. Is this true?
 
The Buildings Department does not track this data.  Buildings data shows that construction incidents on high-rise construction sites, which comprise union and non-union labor sites, increased 49% over the last year, from 69 in CY 2006 to 103 in CY 2007
 
RE: Do you have any data that bears this out, or disproves it? How does the DOB intend on tackling this issue?
 
See above.
 
RE: Does the DOB see illegal immigrant and non-English workers as a major concern for construction safety?  How does the DOB intend to address these issues, if so?
 
In 2006, the Buildings Department, Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs and Occupational Safety and Health Administration convened a Scaffold Worker Safety Task Force after a series of scaffold-related incidents.  The Task Force found speaking English as a second language or speaking a language different than that spoken at the job site was often a factor in fatal construction accidents.  Since 2006, Buildings, MOIA and OSHA have conducted outreach events across the five boroughs to distribute safety information in multiple languages to day laborers and discussed with workers how to stay safe on the job. Under the Task Force, the training requirements for suspended scaffolds are being streamlined, the Buildings Department and OSHA are conducting cross-trainings and performing joint inspections, and a Scaffold Safety Team, which proactively inspects scaffold, was created at the Buildings Department in August 2007. 
 
RE: Why were concrete workers not required to register with the City in the past? 
There was no law requiring them to do so.  
 
RE: What problems do you foresee in this registration process? (For example, I hear that the DCA sometimes has problems registering home renovation contractors to any effect because businesses appear and disappear to evade accountability.)
 
First of all, the Commissioner has recommended the Council seek legislation requiring concrete contractors to register. She has expressed her support for such legislation. But let’s be clear, the legislation hasn’t been proposed yet or signed into law. We are well aware of the issue you bring up here with the HIC contractors. The Department is exploring ways in which it can avoid this evasion of responsibility and accountability.  

---- end e-mail ----

2) Here's an e-mail from Prof. Richard Greenwald, NYU grad and professor at Drew University in Madison, NJ. He's an expert on the Triangle Shirtwaist fire. Of course this is just an overview: most important is his contact information, below. The NYU History faculty has not been so helpful. The link to his book on the fire is below.

---- begin e-mail. -----

>> Could you please describe very briefly the significance of the 1911 fire, and what it helped change in city government and regulations in the following years?

The Triangle Fire, which was the subject of my 2005 book, had an enormous effect on both labor policies and regulations over building in NYC and beyond. After the fire, the state of NY created the Factory Investigating Committee, a committee chaired by Al Smith and Robert Wagner, then leaders of both the state assembly and senate repressively. Smith and Wagner were joined by public members of the FIC. From 1911-1915, the FIC rewrote NYS factory regulations, including occupancy rules, fire safety rules and significant labor regulations. The uproar in the city and state and the death of so many mostly young immigrant women, created a political atmosphere where quick action was possible. Part of the answer is that Tammany Hall, then in firm control of both the state and city government was moved by the fire and working-class political action. Many scholars look at the fire as one of the moments in the creation of modern liberalism.. Frances Perkins, then a lead investigator for the FIC, later a New deal Sec of Labor, said that the new deal was born on March 25, 1911. So, part of the reason for the change was a change in political sensibilities.

Richard Greenwald, Dean Caspersen School of Graduate Studies Director, Business, Society & Culture Program Associate Professor of History Drew University Madison, NJ 07940 Ph: 973/408-3958 Email: rgreenwa@drew.edu 

----- e-mail done----

work plan

Matt provides a good way of getting into researching and focusing a topic. I'd like everyone by Friday to write a memo summarizing what you are looking into, what you've found so far, what you need to know more about, a list of potential sources, and next steps (to-do list). On Friday, let's start firming up which teams are doing which topics, and who is on each team.

Jan Barry

Private Evacuation Consultants: 2/11 memo

This memo packages everything I've come across so far. First I list questions I'm looking into. Then I provide background on the issue. The third section lists potential sources. The final section identifies next steps. It's all in short-hand, and some of it is a note to myself. Let me know if you have any questions and I can explain.

I'm looking at the post-9/11 industry of private evacuation consultants. 2004 Local Law 26 (LL26) required all commercial buildings over 20 stories to develop "emergency evacuation plans" (EAPs), and developed detailed EAP criteria and specs. Overnight a new security consulting industry emerged, and dozens of firms cropped up. I'm going to explore this phenomena, asking some of the questions I've listed below.

I want to look at EAPs specifically (a subset of LL26, not the whole statute). So I will not look at (unless it comes up in my investigation of EAP industries)

• Construction
• Emergency responders
  
• Safety "hardware": fireproofing, stair width, communications, etc.
• Fireprevention / inspections / fire safety education

Questions (no particular order)

Does this system succeed? In other words, are building occupants prepared for emergency evacuation? Is there any way to measure this?

How important are evacuation strategies? Is it realistic to expect one training every three years (the frequency mandated by LL26) will really make a difference in an emergency?

From the NIST and WTC Task Forces, which recommendations were not implemented into LL26 / new building codes? Does anyone think that EAPs are a panacea, and some more of the unimplemented recommendations were more important (but difficult to implement)?

Why does LL26 specify EAPs for “non-fire emergencies”? (why exclude fires?)

How big is the EAP consultant industry? How much money is there in it? Who’s doing it well, who poorly? Are any non-accredited? Any scandals?

Everyone had to get compliance by August 2006. What are these firms doing now?

Businesses contract (sometimes through the building) with EAP consultants. But what about non-business building employees, such as janitorial staff. Do they receive EAP training?

Background

Pre-9/11 codes

No evacuation strategy needed.

Loose and unenforced building codes complicated evacuation on 9/11. For example a 1968 code curtailed stairway number and width requirements. NYT 8/6/04): “According to a study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the 1968 code effectively permitted the Port Authority to decrease the number of stairwells in the trade center from six to three in each of the towers - a change sought by the real estate industry so that more space on each floor would be available for rent.”

NIST

I need to scan relevant sections, NYC (DOB and WTC Building Code Task Force) response

World Trade Center Building Code Task Force

World Trade Center Building Code Task Force published 21 recommendations in February of 2003. September 2004. Bloomberg press release: "13 of these recommendations were incorporated into the bill before me today (Intro 126A); the remaining eight are being implemented by rule change or are still under technical review.”

Intro 126-A (passed 6/7/04)

I'm not certain what the legal relationship b/w Intro 126-A and LL26 is, but they're essentially the same regulation. I think "Intro" is the term the Council uses before its legislation.

“§27-4267.4 Evacuation of office buildings and buildings classified in occupancy group E [office space over 75 feet, or 20 stories]. The commissioner shall promulgate rules establishing standards, procedures and requirements for the orderly evacuation of occupants from any office building or building classified in occupancy group E or part thereof in the interests of public safety, including but not limited to the evacuation of persons necessitated by fire, explosion, biological, chemical or hazardous material incident or release, natural disaster or other emergency, or the threat thereof. Such rules may require the owners of such buildings to develop a written emergency action plan, with provisions for identifying qualified personnel, conducting drills, distributing instructions or informative materials to occupants, and/or such other standards, procedures or requirements that the fire commissioner determines will serve to ensure orderly evacuation. Such rules may also establish requirements for the occupants of such buildings with respect to evacuation and the planning therefore. These requirements shall be in addition to the requirements of other provisions of sections 27-4267 or 27-4267.3 of this code and any other law, rule or regulation enforced by the department.”

• One requirement (retroactive and prospective): Mandatory evacuation plans for non-fire related emergencies [Why limited to non-fire?]
• The law grants the Fire Commissioner the legal authority to require emergency action plans for commercial high-rise buildings and contains new emergency action plan requirements for commercial high-rise buildings. (Council 4/18/07)
• The FDNY worked collaboratively with DOB and engaged the private real estate sector in dialogue during the development of a high-rise building emergency action plan that details new requirements and guidelines under the new law. The FDNY has developed a formal process for submission to and review by the BFP of these plans. These requirements went into effect in August 2006 for all commercial buildings higher than 20 stories. The law also requires building owners and management agents to educate the occupants of these commercial high-rise buildings and provide and test evacuation with these occupants. (ibid)

Local Law 26 / Emergency Action Plans

April 6, 2006 - 3 RCNY §6-02

MUST READ all pages of FDNY’s final LL26 rule: http://www.nyc.gov/html/fdny/html/rcny_legal/rcny_3rcny_sect_6_02.shtml

Local Law 26 of 2004 required that the Fire Commissioner adopt standards, procedures and requirements for the orderly evacuation of occupants from any office building, including evacuation of persons necessitated by explosion, biological, chemical or hazardous material incidents or releases, natural disasters or other emergency, or the threat thereof.

The final rule requires that each office building subject to the requirements of the rule prepare an Emergency Action Plan, submit it for Fire Department review and acceptance, and implement it within designated time frames.

The final rule requires that owners of office buildings develop procedures for sheltering in place, in-building relocation, partial evacuation and full evacuation of the building, in response to various emergency scenarios. The final rule sets forth specific guidelines and requirements for the form and content of the Emergency Action Plan.


9/10/06 - 3 RCNY §9-08

The Fire Department rule setting forth these standards, procedures and requirements was promulgated on April 6, 2006 as 3 RCNY §6-02, “Office Building Emergency Action Plans”. The rule requires the designation of a Fire Safety/Emergency Action Plan Director and sets forth the minimum qualifications for such director, including a requirement to successfully complete at least a seven-hour training course approved by the Department and offered by an educational institution or other organization accredited by the Department.

The Fire Department is now promulgating a rule setting forth minimum instructional and administration requirements for Fire Department accreditation of courses taught by educational institutions to qualify students for the Fire Safety/EAP Director Certificate of Fitness to be issued by the Department.
Bureau of Fire Prevention reviews and approves the plans. Currently no oversight mechanism (http://www.nyc.gov/html/fdny/pdf/strat_plan/2007/goal_5.pdf, page two)

Private firms: what they do, how they function, etc.

From Quality Fire-Protection Consultants, Inc.

• EAP Drafting – We can design and implement an emergency action plan for your building. This plan will conform to FDNY’s requirements and ensure that your building is adequately prepared for non-fire emergencies. We can also update or modify existing plans.
• EAP Drills – Local Law #26 requires that EAP drills be conducted regularly. Our ongoing EAP drill program will provide the necessary training for occupants so that they will react rationally and orderly when confronted with an emergency. We offer drills by floor or for your entire building, as required by the FDNY.
• EAP Training – We will train your building’s deputy EAP director, EAP wardens, and EAP brigade in EAP response techniques. This will include portable extinguisher selection and usage, evacuation procedures, and fire department notification. Two hours initial training (three for deputy directors) and one hour annual training are required by law.
• EAP Seminars and Additional Training – We can provide comprehensive training seminars for your EAP wardens, deputy EAP wardens, and searchers via our multimedia presentation, either in person or online. This seminar will teach your EAP warden team members their various responsibilities and how to interact with the building’s emergency response team and the local fire department in the event of a non-fire emergency.
• Online Training – Our training sessions and seminars can be conducted online and tailored to your individual building.
• Violation Correction – Should your property be issued violations by the FDNY, our staff will assist you by providing necessary documentation and guidance throughout the correction process.
• Building Inspection – We can provide a full on-site building EAP inspection. We will then prepare a written report to inform you of our findings. We will make recommendations so that your building will meet all EAP requirements.

Sources

Codes organizations

National Fire Protection Association, Jack Murphy
National Center for Infrastructure Expertise

Those involved in passing and enforcing LL26
Real Estate Board of New York
Skyscraper Safety Campaign, Sally Regenhard
FDNY Public Information, James Long (double check)

EAP Training Courses
EAP Director Training Course
Total Safety Consulting
Global Security Group
Quality Fire-Protection Consultants, Inc. (largest in NYC)
SafirRosetti (as in Howard Safir)
TRC Fire Safety

Steps

• Contact skyscraper safety campaign, have meeting
• Talk to someone at NFPA
• Read LL 26
• Read NIST
• Talk to an office manager (Pam Stanley)
  
• Talk to a building manager (Pam's recommendation)
  

Daily Eagle

Two recent, interesting articles from the Broolyn Daily Eagle:

safety legislation:

http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=27&id=18200

and toxic legacies , Brooklyn-style:

http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=27&id=18300

Calendar: Event for Environmental-Health Issues

Who is Coming?????

Community Meetings
CB #1 WTC Redevelopment Committee Monday, February 116:00 PM 250 Broadway, Assembly Hearing Room, 19th Floor

WTC Redevelopment Committee DATE: Monday, February 11, 2008 TIME: 6:00 PM PLACE: Assemblymember Sheldon Silver's Office250 Broadway, Assembly Hearing Room, 19th Floor Agenda1) MTA Update, Uday Durg, MTACCC 2) Fiterman Hall Remediation and Demolition – Update by Pei Cobb Freed Presentation on New Building

Link to WNYC (NPR) Investigative Report on Deutsche Bank
http://www.wnyc.org/go.py?r=http%3A//www.wnyc.org/news/articles/93364