MINUTES THIRD ELEVATORS TECHNICAL COUNCIL MEETING OF 2014

Transcription

1 MINUTES THIRD ELEVATORS TECHNICAL COUNCIL MEETING OF 2014 DATE: November 17, 2014 TIME: LOCATION: PRESENT: 9:30 a.m. to 2:20 p.m. ihotel, Red Deer Jim Brownlee, Chair John Carswell, Vice Chair South Robert Logee Bob Palamarek Suresh Sundaram Erin Stroud, Safety Codes Council Dean Bruce, AMA, Chief Elevator Administrator Doug Warne, AEDARSA REGRETS: RECORDER: NEXT MEETING: Calvin Austrom Trevor Doell Jeff Hunter Scott Gavin Sandi Orr Monday, January 26, 2015 in Red Deer at 9:30 a.m.

2 A. Call to Order The Chair called the meeting to order at 9:33 a.m. B. Approval of Agenda John Carswell / Bob Palamarek moved to adopt the agenda, as circulated; CARRIED C. Approval of Minutes Bob Palamarek / John Carswell moved to adopt the September 15, 2014 meeting minutes, as circulated; CARRIED D. Business Arising from the Minutes E ASME A /CSA B44 13 Code Book update The Chief Administrator reported that the draft was circulated at the last meeting and no further feedback was received. The draft was presented to the Building sub-council last week and will be presented to the Fire sub-council later this week. During the Building sub-council meeting, there were questions regarding the process to change references in the Alberta Building Code relative to Elevating Devices Standards. During other stakeholder consultation in the fire discipline, there is still confusion regarding the 2007 code. There also continues to be confusion regarding using elevators for evacuation. This is not the message that is being given but the challenge exists relative to the elevator still operating. It was clarified that any proposed changes to the code would have to be presented to this sub-council for consideration. As the majority are false alarms, BOMA would prefer allowing the elevators to continue operating rather needed to have the elevators reset. A cost analysis is being compiled regarding the hydraulic cylinder replacements, MCP and testing requirements. An in depth discussion was held regarding MCP and whether the intent was to require this only for new installations and alterations or retroactive for all elevators. Consensus was reached that this requirement will be for all elevators with an 18 month proposed delay of the in force date for existing elevators. Further discussion relative to the regulation was addressed under E E New Initiative for Compliance of Outstanding Deficiencies - update As this has only just started being implementing, there was little to report. E Elevator Company and Mechanic Certification Robert Logee reported that although discussion has been held for some time, this topic has never been discussed at Provincial Advisory Committee meetings. MINUTES: Elevators Technical Council Meeting: November 17, 2014 Page 2

3 A discussion was held regarding certification and whether this should be under the jurisdiction of AIT or the Council. As this certification is trade-related, it is likely this should remain with AIT. Discussion was held regarding whether a sub-council member should be on the PAC in order to ensure that there are never changes considered that would affect the Elevating Devices Regulation. Robert Logee is the PAC Chair and will continue to service on the subcouncil for another 3-year term. It was noted that the Chief Administrator is also invited to the PAC meetings as a guest. E. New Business E Elevating Devices Code Regulation The draft Elevating Devices Code Regulation was reviewed and clarification was provided regarding how some drafters would prefer the whole clause being struck when there are changes rather than just the specific portion of the clause. Clarification was sought regarding 14(f) and what this confirmation might look like. It was suggested that this clause could be further clarified in an Information STANDATA after the Regulation is adopted. It was suggested that although documentation might also be available off-site, all documentation needs to be on site. The logbook should contain any maintenance or testing of that device. The logbook could be considered as confirmation. It was recognized work is still needed to be done on how this would be implemented. Clause 14(f) was revised to read: written confirmation that all requirements of 8.6. and 8.11 are complied with. This led to a discussion regarding periodic testing and there not being sufficient information on site for mechanics relative to procedures. It was recognized that this has been an industry problem for a long time and that contractors should not be bidding on jobs unless they are aware of the unique maintenance requirements of a particular device. Clause 12 of the draft Regulation regarding Code Article was reviewed and it was questioned that if an MCP already extends the intervals, why would a letter from the manufacturer be required. After an in depth discussion was held regarding the clause, no changes to the draft Regulation were proposed. With regard to the drafter s question Is the Note at the end of (a) to remain? Consensus was reached that this note should remain as part of the Regulation. Clause 5 of the draft Regulation regarding Code Article was reviewed and a discussion was held regarding whether or not this was already sufficiently addressed in the code. A motion was made to strike this clause. With no seconder, the motion was not considered. The Chief Administrator explained the challenges associated with door restrictors having a high rate of failure. Although this is improving, concern was expressed regarding solely relying on these untrusted devices. Some of the challenges were also explained regarding alterations and how this might not be feasible due to limited existing pit depths. Consensus was reached that this should be a requirement for all elevators but that the current practice should be included in the Regulation which would allow a shorter length to be accepted for alterations if the pit depth could not accommodate a 48 toe guard. MINUTES: Elevators Technical Council Meeting: November 17, 2014 Page 3

4 Clause 5 was revised to read: Notwithstanding Requirement , all platform guards (aprons) will in no case be less than 1220 mm (48 in.). In the case of alterations, the platform guard shall be to a maximum length to fit the existing pit A discussion was held regarding the grace periods for any changes to the code that will have significant financial impacts. Consensus was reached on the following: MCP and Category 5 Testing for new devices and alterations to be effective on the Regulation in force date MCP and Category 5 Testing for existing devices to be effective 18 months after the Regulation in force date Replacement of Hydraulic Cylinders 5 years after the Regulation in force date Further discussion was held regarding whether it would be allowable to simply list these grace periods within a STANDATA or whether these grace periods would have to be imbedded in the Regulation. The Chief Administrator will consult with the legislative drafter to determine how best to address these grace periods and will report back to the subcouncil. [Bruce] John Carswell / Suresh Sundaram moved to recommend to the Minister, through the Coordinating Committee, the adoption of the draft Elevating Devices Regulation, as amended and to waive the 90-day review period; CARRIED E Chair Appointment The Chair reported that he asked Trevor Doell if he would consider being appointed as the Chair but has not yet received a response. This item was deferred to the next meeting which was scheduled prior to the expiration of the current Chair s appointment. E Vice Chair South Appointment This item was deferred to the January 2015 meeting. E Vice Chair North Appointment This item was deferred to the January 2015 meeting. It was further suggested that all members that have reached their maximum number of terms should consult with their nominating organization to get them working on a replacement. It was further noted that should an individual have interest in serving on the sub-council that they be invited to participate as a guest at the January 2015 meeting. [Paches] MINUTES: Elevators Technical Council Meeting: November 17, 2014 Page 4

5 E Clarification of Usage for LPPD & Material Lifts (Oct 17 Letter from AEDARSA) Correspondence from AEDARSA was reviewed regarding their interpretation relative to the use of LPPDs. Owners interpret the Standard to be relative to the design only and not the usage. In AEDARSA s opinion, the scope relative to the LPPD Standard is quite clear and that these devices are not intended to be used as material lifts. The Manager of Stakeholder Relations provided an overview of the challenges being discussed at the Barrier Free Council when after occupancy, barrier free provisions are not being maintained (e.g. a barrier free washroom turned into storage, an LPPD used as a freight elevator, etc.). It was noted that a safety codes officer has the authority to enforce these provisions when infractions are found. After a review of the scope of the LPPD Standard and a thorough discussion regarding the issue, the members of the Elevator Technical Council deemed that LPPDs are not to be used as material lifts and requested that the Chief Administrator correspond to AEDARSA to advise them of the sub-council s position. [Bruce] F. Technical Coordinating Committee Update An overview was provided from the last Technical Coordinating Committee meeting relative to the Elevator sub-council. An update was provided on the amendments to the Safety Codes Act. G Meetings The next meeting will be held on Monday, January 26, 2015 in Red Deer at 9:30 a.m. John Carswell / Suresh Sundaram moved that the meeting be adjourned; CARRIED The meeting was adjourned at 2:20 p.m. MINUTES: Elevators Technical Council Meeting: November 17, 2014 Page 5

6 --- A C T I O N I T E M S --- E Vice Chair North Appointment Bob Palamarek reported that REIC/IREM is waiting for a letter from the Council in order to seek a new representative. [Paches] E Clarification of Usage for LPPD & Material Lifts (Oct 17 Letter from AEDARSA) After a review of the scope of the LPPD Standard and a thorough discussion regarding the issue, the members of the Elevator Technical Council deemed that LPPDs are not to be used as material lifts and requested that the Chief Administrator correspond to AEDARSA to advise them of the sub-council s position. [Bruce] B. Approval of Agenda --- M O T I O N S --- John Carswell / Bob Palamarek moved to adopt the agenda, as circulated; CARRIED C. Approval of Minutes Bob Palamarek / John Carswell moved to adopt the September 15, 2014 meeting minutes, as circulated; CARRIED E Elevating Devices Code Regulation John Carswell / Suresh Sundaram moved to recommend to the Minister, through the Coordinating Committee, the adoption of the draft Elevating Devices Regulation, as amended and to waive the 90-day review period; CARRIED G Meetings John Carswell / Suresh Sundaram moved that the meeting be adjourned; CARRIED MINUTES: Elevators Technical Council Meeting: November 17, 2014 Page 6