|
Fire Sprinkler
Fitter Bill Passes First Test in House
It wasn’t the
Oslo Accords, but it was historical from the
standpoint that union and non-union fire
suppression contractors, sprinkler fitters
and plumbers, building officials and fire
officials, and state and local agencies
all came together
for the common purpose of ensuring the
quality of fire sprinkler system
installations, by ensuring they are
installed by qualified individuals.
On Wednesday, February 24th,
HB10-1241, Concerning Required Registration
for Persons Who Work on Fire Suppression
Systems (by Rep. Casso and Sen. Tochtrop)
was heard by House Business Affairs & Labor
Committee. The bill passed on a 6-4-1 party
line vote, with amendments proposed by the
Joint Ad-Hoc Residential Sprinkler
Committee. Republicans on the committee
viewed the bill as an attempt to limit
access to the sprinkler fitter trade to
those that meet “union” qualifications.
They expressed concern about the
availability of apprenticeship programs to
non-union shops, and agreed with the
Department of Regulatory Agencies (DORA)
that the program needed a Sunrise Review
before going forward.
Only one individual (a non-union sprinkler
contractor) spoke against the bill. He
indicated that the bill created a new level
of regulation and did nothing to address the
multitude of local regulatory schemes. He
expressed the belief that the bill
represented “de-facto” unionization of the
trade because the only path to registration
as a sprinkler fitter is through an approved
apprenticeship program (and the only
approved apprenticeship programs are union
programs). His conclusion was that the bill
would increase the cost of sprinkler systems
and decrease productivity. Other non-union
sprinkler contractors that testified did not
share this concern and expressed they had
(or had access to) training programs that
would meet the requirements of the bill.
The National Fire Sprinkler Association (NFSA)
also testified to this fact.
DORA testified that the registration of
sprinkler fitters represents a new
regulatory function that required a Sunrise
Review (a review by DORA staff to determine
if the regulatory function is indicated and
necessary). A handful of union sprinkler
contractors and the Denver Fire Department
testified in support of the bill expressing
that the issue is the need for quality fire
sprinkler system installations, regardless
of whether the contractor is union or
non-union.
The Division of Fire Safety, the Colorado
Chapter of ICC, and CSFCA/FMAC spoke
primarily to the proposed amendments. These
amendments were intended to clean up the
state regulatory scheme for fire suppression
systems in the face of new and emerging
Residential Sprinkler System (RSS)
technology. The current regulatory scheme
causes a duplication of effort and
represents an artificial barrier to
increased acceptance of RSS. Rob Geislinger
testified on behalf of FMAC and the CSFCA
and explained the regulatory approach
proposed by
Amendment L.002:
·
DFS would continue to regulate standalone
fire suppression systems and fire
suppression contractors (and as a result of
the bill, would now regulate sprinkler
fitters).
·
Multipurpose residential sprinkler systems
connected to the potable water supply in
one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses
would be regulated by the plumbing board.
Amendment L.003
clarifies that apprentices are able to
perform work under the supervision of a
registered sprinkler fitter.
While the State Plumbing Board was
represented at the hearing, and are
conceptually supportive of the regulatory
scheme, they did not testify as the
Administration has not taken a formal
position on the bill. The State Plumbing
Board recognizes if the bill passes they
will need to promulgate rules on the minimum
requirements for plumbers to install
combination systems, and expressed they
would do so in consultation with
stakeholders.
Rep. Casso, the House Sponsor and the
committee were made aware that further
amendments will be necessary, most of which
are technical in nature, such as clarifying
that the Division of Fire Safety would
perform the registration function and any
local requirements would be in addition to
this.
HB10-1241, as amended, was referred to the
Appropriations Committee as it has a state
fiscal impact (cash funding of the Division
of Fire Safety’s additional regulatory
responsibilities).
Posted 02-24-10 |
