OVERVIEW OF THE NEED FOR REGULATORY STREAMLINING & FIATECH’S ROLE

GENERIC PRESENTATION FROM THE FIATECH REALTIME PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND REGULATORY STREAMLINING ELEMENT 6 - JANUARY, 2012

PROJECT MANAGEMENT & REGULATORY STREAMLINING – TEAM MEMBERS • Board Liaisons: Steven Makredes, Target & Kevin Hart, Kaiser

Permanente• Streamlining Project Steering Committee: - Ron Loback, Avolve – Chair & Element 6 Roadmap Champion Lead - Thomas Phillips – Target – Vice Chair - Jonathan Widney – Solibri - Marla Schuchman – ARX – Lead Digital Seals Project • FIATECH Project Manager - Robert Wible

GENERIC OVERVIEW OF REGULATORY STREAMLINING

• The Nation’s Current Regulatory System & Need for Regulatory Streamlining

• Helping Both the Public & Private Sectors Be More Effective & Efficient• Areas in Need of Streamlining• Examples - Current FIATECH Regulatory Streamlining Projects: - Guideline for Replicable Buildings - ePlan/BIM - Digital Seals - Proof of Concept AutoCodesMAY WE BE OF ASSISANCE?

NATION’S CURRENT REGULATORY SYSTEM

• Federal Government• 50 State and 4 Territorial Governments•Native American Tribal Governments• 40,000 local jurisdictions – Counties, Cities, Towns

& Townships• Regional & Special District Regulatory Authorities

for – Fire, Water, Sewer, Conservation, Historic Preservation, Economic Development, etc.

CURRENT REGULATORY SYSTEM – NATURE OF FEDERALISM

• Limited Federal Authority• Police (regulatory powers) generally reserved to

States except for those powers specifically related to Interstate Commerce - Transportation – Air, Water and Federal highways & the Environment • All other powers by 10th Amendment are reserved

to the States and their local units of government.

CURRENT REGULATORY SYSTEM

Grew from Colonial Times – Simple regulation construction & commerce • 13 Colonies to 50 States & 4 Territories• Nation of 2.5 million to 310 million Complexities of technology& modern life: health, welfare & life safety including the environment

NEED FOR REGULATORY STREAMLINING

FROM EARLY 1900’S TO PRESENT TREMENDOUS GROWTH IN COMPLEXITY - From Simple regulations over construction, interstate commerce, fire safety, and public health to:• Highway construction, operation & maintenance• Energy production and use• Water, sewer, storm water runoff & pollution• Content of products & their production & use• Recycling & disposal of waste• Health and safety of workers• Transportation of hazardous & oversized materials

REGULATORY OVERLAP AND DUPLICATION BY AGENCIES AT ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT • EXAMPLES IN ROAD TRANSPORTATION: - What is being transported? - Over what kind of road – Federal, state, county, local road? - What are width and load limits for each type of road and for bridges encountered along the transportation route? - Are any of the components of what is being transported classified as a hazardous material by Federal, state or local government? - Where are vehicles doing the transportation licensed? Who inspects them? - Are “Escort Vehicles” required to accompany what’s being transported? Do different states, local jurisdictions transited along the route have different requirements for escort vehicles?

REGULATORY STREAMLINING – THE NEED

GIVEN SEVERE RECESSION & NEED FOR MORE RAPID RECOVERY FROM BOTH MAN-MADE AND NATURAL DISASTERS NATION CAN NO LONGER AFFORD A REGULATORY SYSTEM THAT WAS BUILT IN MID-1900’S & IS: • Cumbersome, overlapping, poorly administered• Does not delineate clear lines of authority & jurisdiction• Leaves compliance to guesswork and repeated re-applications, reviews

and inspections• Long waiting periods between each regulatory step• Presents barriers to innovative products, processes & materialsNOT ABOUT REGULATORY ABANDONMENT BUT ABOUT EFFICIENCY!!!

FOR EXAMPLE – THE BUILDING REGULATORY PROCESS

FIATECH REGULATORY STREAMLINING PROJECT - MISSION

• Enhance our nation’s public safety, disaster resilience and economic competitiveness…• By streamlining and applying information

technology to the nation’s regulatory process…•Making it more effective and efficient – clarifying

compliance and reducing time in regulatory process by up to 80%

THE USA IS AWASH IN REGULATIONS & PAPER

“Streamline permitting. Cut red tape so job-creating construction and

infrastructure projects can move forward.”

ENABLING NEW WAYS TO WORK

ePlan Review

DIG-SIGs

AutoCodes

ReplicableBuildingsGuideline

ReplicableBuildingsGuideline

REPLICABLE BUILDINGS GUIDELINE

• Participants: Target Corporation, DuPont, Intel, Avolve Software, Solibri, ICC, Salem, OR; Clark Co., NV; Salt Lake City, UT

• RBG Status:– Key to large-scale regulatory reform– Defines “replicable” structure qualifications– Adoption parameters (high-level)– Guideline Drafted by FIATECH in 2009 and Released by ICC for adoption/use

Sept., 2010• Supporting adoption by jurisdictions in 2010 -11• Target Corporation field-testing and reports

REPLICABLE BUILDINGS GUIDELINE

• Keys elements – Single review for all but site specific issues– Repeatable process, check lists– Provides authoritative review for validation – Top-down and bottom-up adoption– Case studies (and more case studies)– Being adopted now by NY, NJ, & localities across U.S.SAMPLE SAVINGS - TARGET STORES $100,000PER STORE IN DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

DIGITAL SEALS PROJECT

• PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED: Only ½ of 50 States and most countries do net yet recognize digital seals on building plans slowing the use of ePlan review technologies

• PROJECT APPROACH: Identify barriers to gaining jurisdiction approval of digital seals and produce a Guide to Using Digital Seals that FIATECH members and stakeholders can use to work with administrative and legislative bodies to gain approval e-seal approval

• PROJECT TEAM & LEAD: ARX – LEAD, Participating members: Hatch, Avolve, Solibri, Target, Kaiser Permanent – Partner - AIA

• PROJECT DELIVERABLES: Research, Produce, Disseminate Guide , Identify several jurisdictions to target to gain acceptance of digital seals. - Produce and Release in 2012

AUTOCODES – EXPEDITED PERMITTING VIA DIGITAL REVIEW

PHASES I AND II - UPDATE AND STATUS REPORT

60 DAYS TO 60 SECONDS!

AUTOCODES PROJECT OBJECTIVE

•Mission:–Make plan review, storage, retrieval more

efficient reduce plan review time by 80%–Facilitate use of BIM data in both the regulatory

& construction processes–Create greater uniformity across the nation in

code adoption, interpretation and application

AUTOCODES – UPDATE – PHASE IA

• Phase I – Background– Scope– Objectives– Methodology

• POC Implementation and status

• 2D Plan Review Collection Results– Number of respondents– Number of comments (gross, average)– Spread of the comments– Analysis of responses

POC PARTICIPANTS – 14 VOLUNTARY PARTNERS

• ICC – Chicago

• States– New Jersey– New York

• Counties– Mecklenburg, NC

• Cities– Bend, OR– San Jose, CA– Livermore, CA– Redwood City, CA– Irvine, CA– Salt Lake City, UT– Amarillo, TX– Carrollton, TX– Houston, TX– Philadelphia, PA

★

★

★★

★

★

★

★

★

✪

★

★

✪

★

Mecklenburg County, NC

State of NJ

State of NY

Philadelphia

Amarillo

Carrollton

Houston

Salt Lake City

Bend

Irvine

Livermore Redwood City San Jose

ICC - Chicago

AUTOCODES UPDATE – PHASE IA (CONTINUED)• 2D Plan Review Data Analysis– What we learned• Vs what we expected• What we didn’t expect

– GAP Analysis between respondents• Did not anticipate the need for this, so really a positive development• What to do with this information?

• Approval if issues corrected?– If NO, why not?

SNAPSHOT OF COMMENTS

Codes Comments Non-Compliant

Not Enough Info

Guideline Statements

IBC 2009 IL, NC, NY, OR, PA, TX, UT

177 46 122 11

ADA OR

CBC CA

NJAC/IBC/ANSI

NJ

High 42 16 26 5

Low 1 0 1 0

AUTOCODES – PHASE IB - UNDERWAY

• 3D Model Review– Check against current SMC Rulesets– Modify Templates Accordingly– Identify 2D components in 3D model

• Inform Target Corporation of Model Discrepancies– As compared to 2D– As required for viable checking• Creates a model protocol by-product

AUTOCODES – PHASE IB (METHODOLOGY)

• Invite three jurisdictions to participate in 3D Checking

• Provide Technology and Familiarization Sessions to Participants

• Provide Rulesets to Jurisdictions

• Modify Ruleset Templates for Specific Jurisdictions

AUTOCODES – PHASE IB – CURRENT STATUS

• Collaborate with participants in running Accessibility and Egress Check

• Record process and approaches for intent v content understanding

• Generate results

• DEVELOP Jurisdiction Report Format

AUTOCODES – PHASE IB – LOOKING AHEAD

• Review results from Jurisdiction Model Checks

• Compare results for consistency

• Generate a GAP analysis

• Complete by 15 December 2011

• Use results to influence Ruleset development

• Discussion - The ROI ecosystem

AUTOCODES – PHASE II – BEYOND THE POC

• Area of next focus– Expanded use of Accessibility and Egress Rulesets – different building types– Fire & Life Safety– Mechanical & Engineering (M&E)

• Engage with Phase I Jurisdictions + Expanded Audience– Design Firms, GC’s and MEP firms– Owners and Code Consultants

CAN FIATECH HELP YOU WITH YOUR REGULATORY STREAMLINING ISSUES IN?• Building design & construction• Zoning & Land Use• Environment• Transportation• Energy Use• Work place safety• Other areas

IF SO CONTACT US TO LEARN MORE ABOUT BENEFITS OF REGULATORY STREAMLINING & FIATECH

Contact FIATECH Regulatory Streamlining Project Manager, Robert Wible at:• 703-568-2323• wible@fiatech.org

• Visit FIATECH website for Video on AutoCodes & other projects• www.fiatech.org