October 7, 2002

COMING NOV. 1
If you missed the Great Lakes Fabricators & Erectors Association's Sept. 27th breakfast meeting on Michigan's just issued standard on steel erection, you lost more than just free bacon and eggs. Participants gained an excellent learning opportunity as well as a chance to network within the organization to efficiently and effectively implement the new standard's many provisions. The next event will be held on the Friday morning of Nov. 1, on the topic of "Holding the Line on Project Costs - Designing Lower Cost Steel Structures." Geared for engineers, architects, contractors, and others involved in structural steel fabrication and erection, it will discuss some of the variables that push up costs, including incomplete designs and inappropriate specifications. Design solutions that result in economical steel construction will be provided. Making presentations will be GLFEA President Don Makins, president of MBM Fabricators & Erectors, Romulus, and William Treharne, PE, director of engineering and administration at Midwest Steel Inc., Detroit. To be held at the Westin Hotel at Southfield's Town Center, the free event starts with a complimentary breakfast from 7:30-8 a.m. followed by a one hour long program. At 9 a.m. you can get back to work. Reservations are a must. Please call the GLFEA office at 313/309-2000 or fax a note to 313/309-2004 by Monday, Oct. 28. Also, keep Dec. 6 open for another GLFEA breakfast meeting on a topic of interest to the steel construction industry.

TO THE HIGHEST BENCH
The AFL-CIO's Building & Construction Trades Department isn't kidding. Sometime this week (reportedly by October 10) it plans to file a petition for a writ of certiorati before the U.S. Supreme Court. It will be challenging the Sept. 6th decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit regarding project labor agreements. As you recall, the appeals court ordered the U.S. District Court there to remove its injunction enforcing President George W. Bush's executive order restricting PLAs on federally assisted construction projects. The district court had held that the president had "exceeded his constitutional and statutory authority" within Section 3 of Executive Order 13202. The court case in question is known as AFL-CIO BCTD v. Allbaugh. Some observers express doubt the high court will take it up. Even if it does, a ruling may or may not be issued during the current term. But you never know.

SECURITY CONSCIOUS?
Although the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack woke the nation up about security considerations in architectural design, if a recent poll by the American Institute of Architects is any measure, we're getting drowsy again. True, of the 400 respondents, 55% say their clients believe building security has become a higher priority. However, when it comes to doing something about it - as in spending more money - only 46% of the architects say that at least one client has ordered a security feature for a building under design, or for retrofitting into an existing one. Just under half agree buildings are "better protected against terrorists attacks" than a year ago. More than half say clients for governmental, judicial, and other public buildings are calling for more security features. But only 24% say their clients for office buildings want more security features and a mere 3% of their hotel and retail clients are calling for them. In New York City there are indications of some increased security related design, including revisions to plans for the 52 story New York Times Building, which is set to break ground next spring. Outside of the Big Apple and our nation's capital, interest in the subject appears to have become - well - subdued. Certainly part of the reason may be a recognition of how difficult and expensive it is to design and build structures that can resist determined terrorist attacks. Few want, much less can afford, buildings built to security and strength standards exceeding those for nuclear reactor containment vessels. They'd look pretty ugly, too. Yes, some structural and fireproofing measures can be taken. Even so, wanton destruction is far easier than construction, the accomplishment of men and women of peace, and intercepting the terrorists before they attack is probably the best course.

FOR LOADING DURING CONSTRUCTION
Some 14 years in the making, the Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) of the American Society of Civil Engineers has released a new design standard for loads placed on structures during construction. Entitled SEI/ASCE 37-02, its aim is to provide a design tool for engineers and contractors to help eliminate - or at least substantially reduce - structural failures that can occur as a structure is being raised. It's considered the first of its kind. However, as Robert T. Ratay observes, it does not change a contractor's responsibility for the integrity of structures as they are being raised. A consulting engineer who hails from Manhasset, N.Y., Mr. Ratay chairs the SEI committee that developed the standard. Observers from the design community expect the new standard will exert its greatest influence on long span structures. Of course, experienced contractors know a completed structure is far stronger than one that's being built but the new standard should prove helpful in determining the loads on individual parts as the frame is going up. The standard determines safety factors, design loads, and combinations of loads useful during design and analysis for both permanent and temporary structures, such as falsework, hoists, scaffolding and shoring. Load reduction factors are included for short term exposures to earthquakes, storms, and similar events, rather than typical events expected during the structure's life. The results are supposed to be suitable for strength design or allowable stress design and are based on observations of construction practices, opinions from experts, and probability analysis. The SEI plans on holding seminars on the new standard during 2003. A schedule has not been released.

JAMMED
At last report House and Senate conferees were still at odds over legislation to provide federal assistance for building insurance covering terrorist acts. The problem has really been hitting our nation hard, notes President Bush, with "more than $15.5 billion worth of construction projects that are not moving ahead because insurance is not available to cover the projects, or can not insure the buildings." Last week the President met with the conferees, encouraging them to reach a workable compromise before Congress adjourns for the year. At this stage that's not considered likely. Liability issues to shield businesses and taxpayers from punitive damages in the event of a terrorist attack appear to be the big sticking points.

NOT ENOUGH
As in not enough bridges and roads in good condition. In testimony Sept. 26 before a House subcommittee, Mary Peters, head of the Federal Highway Administration, said that it would take a combined annual expenditure of $106.9 billion to improve the nation's roads. To just maintain existing conditions some $75.9 billion would have to be spent. In 2000 a total of $64.6 billion was spent, with the federal share pegged at $25.8 billion, or roughly 40%. The remainder was made up by state and local road funding. Last week the House Appropriations Committee approved a federal highway funding program of $27.7 billion for fiscal year 2003. While that'll pay for a number of new bridges, our nation is still falling behind its needs.

PSO LONG, BUT NOT REALLY
I'd like to personally thank the readers of the Riveteer for their attention and support. This column is being discontinued (although if enough people raise a stink about it, who knows?) Whatever the response, thank heaven I'm not being discontinued as well. At least, not right now. (But who knows? If enough people raise enough…?) Seriously now, the GLFEA instead wants to take a new and far more direct approach to covering and commenting on news of significant impact to its members as well as the steel construction industry at large. Rather than short items of interest, the association is gearing up to zero-in on specific topics, emphasizing how they may directly affect you. I'm going to be looking at what the GLFEA is doing to address them in a proactive and constructive manner. What you'll be seeing on the web page is a series of special focus articles. The articles will also be faxed or mailed to association members as soon as they're ready. As always, we'll appreciate any suggestions you can make. Please submit your ideas to the Great Lakes Fabricators & Erectors Association as soon as possible. You can call the GLFEA's offices in downtown Detroit at 313/309-2000. Or you can drop an email to Guy Snyder at guysny@concentric.net or call him at 313/961-9217. We hope to hear from you soon!