Page images
PDF
EPUB

accepted industry standards and which have been certified as having met the requirements of such standards should have a place in the building codes of each community, without limitation or restriction, unless there is a local geologic, climatic or soil condition which would warrant a limitation on its use. This policy, in our opinion, does not impair the right of individual choice on the part of builders, developers, designers or homeowners in the use of any material, provided that such material conforms to the accepted industry standards. We feel that our policy is fair to all concerned and in effect places the determination of whether or not a particular material is acceptable to the user squarely in the market place where it belongs in our society. Any legislation which would seek to deny this principle of free enterprise would not be acceptable.

I am sure that you agree with this principle. Thank you for continued interest in these matters.

Sincerely,

GEORGE ROMNEY.

JULY 21, 1970.

Hon. GEORGE W. ROMNEY,

Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. SECRETARY: I am reliably informed that four organizations which publish so-called model building codes are now in the process of preparing for publication a model One and Two Family Dwelling Code. It is further reported that the four organizations have undertaken this task at the request of the National Association of Home Builders.

For the information of the subcommitee, please advise whether your de partment intends to require state and local governments having Workable Programs for Community Improvement to change existing codes and adopt the new dwelling code in whole or in part as a necessary condition for obtaining recertification of their programs.

In view of the governmental function which the four building code bodies are performing in developing this code, I am particularly concerned that each such body comply with the requirements of due process and accord full opportunity to be heard and to participate in the decision, not only to its own members but to all parties liable to be affected.

I am further disturbed by the report that this code is being developed at the request and encouragement of the NAHB. As you know well, the NAHB in pursuit of its proper role is frequently engaged in economic conflict with other building industry interests that are also directly affected by provisions contained in building or related codes. I trust therefore that a family dwelling code designed to please an organization of home builders will first be cleared also with representatives of other groups in the building industry before it is designated a model code by your agency.

Response at your earliest convenience will be most helpful to the subcommittee. Sincerely,

JOHN C. KLUCZYNSKI,
Member of Congress.

THE SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
Washington, D.C., August 28, 1970.

Hon. JOHN C. KLUCZYNSKI,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. KLUCZYNSKI: Your inquiry of July 21, 1970 relative to the publication of a model One and Two Family Dwelling Code by the four model code organizations is timely, and I have delayed my reply to obtain complete information. The subject code has been developed and we are advised that it is now in the final draft waiting for approval by each of the four groups. I assume that it will be made available to the public for review and comment as soon as publication can be made.

As I understand the procedures used by the model code people in the development of their codes, anyone may be heard, may offer criticism, comments, or proposals either for or against any provision of the codes at the regularly scheduled hearing conducted by these organizations, and at the annual confer

ences of each organization. In addition, the model codes, once printed and offered to the public for adoption, do not have any legal authority until they are actually adopted by a local community, at which time there are public hearings (in most cases required by law) before adoption. At the hearings anyone may comment, approve, or disapprove of any provision of the code offered for adoption on the local level. This would seem to offer ample opportunity for "due process" to anyone interested or affected by such codes.

The need for a comprehensive one and two family construction to include building, plumbing, and electrical standards, has been apparent for a long time, particularly in the interest of serving those smaller communities which generally have little need for the Big City codes and which have little access to any volume of qualified personnel for interpretation and enforcement of the more complicated codes. The four model code groups have joined together in recognition of this need to produce a single code rather than a separate code by each such organization. I believe that they should be encouraged in such an effort, if only for the sake of uniformity.

The relationship of the National Association of Home Builders to this effort is, I am advised, only that of a proponent of such a code since they will be much the same position as anyone else in regard to the actual content of the code.

As to HUD acceptance of the final product as a model code, I can assure you that we will certainly make a complete and comprehensive analysis of the finished product. We do not, at this time, contemplate or consider making the adoption of such code a prerequisite for Workable Program approval.

I appreciate your continued interest and concern in such matters.
Sincerely,

[Telegram]

(S) George Romney. GEORGE ROMNEY.

SEPTEMBER 17, 1970.

Hon. JOHN C. KLUCZYNSKI,

Chairman, House Subcommiteee,
In care of U.S. Courthouse.
Chicago, Ill.:

The International Molders and Allied Workers Union would like to take this opportunity to protest against the tactics of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Representatives have been pressuring local authorities to lower building code standards to allow the use of cheaper materials in place of cast iron pipe. Cheap substitutes must be replaced repeatedly and cast iron lasts a lifetime. Low income families deserve better treatment from their Government. Our Union, which represents the workers in the Cast Iron Pipe industry, urges your Committee to investigate these practices which have resulted in the destruc tion of jobs and unemployment.

Thank you for your consideration.

WM. A. LAZZERINI, President.

CALIFORNIA TESTING LABORATORIES, INC.,
Los Angeles, Calif., July 23, 1969.

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: This is to certify that the Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) DWV pipe in sealed wrappers is standard drain-waste-vent piping purchased on the open market and Ultrasonic Tested by California Testing Laboratories, Inc. The pencil markings on the pipe indicate the location and the size of the defects.

JOHN D. CARLON, Sr.,

We certify that the above report made in our laboratories.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 23 day of July 1969.

Testing Director.

HELN V. LARSEN,

Notary Public.

[From Monitor, August 1970]

PLASTICS AND FIRE1

Coming to a head in West Germany is a situation that may become a serious concern to plastics suppliers and users. West German insurance companies have tabbed plastics-and notably polyvinyl chloride (PVC)—as the causative factor in steeply rising fire-damage costs in the plants that store plastics.

Pinpointing PVC in fire-damage complaints belies the material's high hydrochloric acid content which reduces its flammability. But the West German report states that when PVC is heated to 392 degrees Fahrenheit, as it would be in a plant fire, it decomposes and releases clouds of hydrochloric acid gas that corrode metal equipment and building structures. Within 3 days rust-like corrosion stains form on exposed metal and the gas liberated by the decomposed PVC combines chemically with the lime in plaster and concrete walls to create a persistent corrosive agent (calcium chloride). This seeps deep into the walls and attacks structural steel members.

Thus the initial fire damage may be only a fraction of the actual damage. In one instance, initial fire damage estimated at $2,000 was adjusted upward to $4,000,000 after insurance investigators discovered the hidden damage caused by the corrosive fumes.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE ILLINOIS FAIR PLAN

Despite many obstacles and inherent difficulties, it can be fairly stated that the Illinois Property Insurance Placement Facility has achieved its principal objective of making fire insurance available to property owners in areas where it has become increasingly difficult to obtain this protection.

To date, 96% of urban properties submitted to the Facility are being approved for fire insurance, many of them at rates lower than their owners previously paid. As of August 31, 1970, a total of 42,040 properties have been inspected and offered insurance protection since the first policy was issued under the Fair Plan. While there probably is no means of determining just how many could not have secured some insurance coverage through conventional channels, it seems fair to conclude that of the more than 45,000 policies issued, much of the coverage would not have been available were it not for the Illinois Fair Plan. Only about 1500 properties (approximately 3%) have been conditionally declined and less than 500 (approximately 1%) turned down as uninsurable. See attached Exhibit A.

Latest figures show the Facility has processed more than 49,000 applications with written premiums exceeding 8 million dollars. For a more detailed reports of latest available Fair Plan Underwriting Experience, refer to the attached Exhibit B.

EXHIBIT A.-ILLINOIS PROPERTY INSURANCE PLACEMENT FACILITY
REPORT ON FACILITY APPLICATIONS AS OF AUG. 31, 1970

[blocks in formation]

1 From Detroit Chapter Newsletter. American Society of Safety Engineers.

[blocks in formation]

Note: These figures have been developed through analysis of premium and loss data intended for accounting use as submitted by servicing insurers. Because of the limited period during which the facility has been operating, it has not been possible to test the adequacy of the incurred but not reported reserves against mature experience. AUGUST 5, 1970.

Illinois Property Insurance Placement Facility, 175 West Jackson Boulevard, Room 2140, Chicago, Illinois. Area Code 312-427-9614.

Illinois Automobile Insurance Plan, 11 South LaSalle Street, Room 1938, Chicago, Illinois. Area Code 312-346-1991.

Illinois Industrial Commission, Workmens Compensation Assigned Risk Pool, 160 North LaSalle Street, Room 1330, Chicago, Illinois. Area Code 312-7933358.

Department of Insurance, State of Illinois, Public Services Division, 160 North La Salle Street, Chicago, Illinois. Area Code 312-793-2440.

Department of Insurance, State of Illinois, Public Services Division, 525 Jefferson Street West, Springfield, Illinois. Area Code 217-525-7471.

[From the U.S. News & World Report, Sept. 21, 1970]

NEW SYSTEM OF AUTO INSURANCE ON THE WAY?

The first auto insurance law that allows people to collect for personal injuries, no matter who is at fault in an accident, has been adopted in Massachusetts. The plan, called "no-fault" insurance, goes into effect in that State in January, 1971.

It could be the first step in the overhaul of insurance laws in many parts of the country. At least 18 other States are taking a look at some sort of "no-fault" legislation, including proposals that would provide much broader coverage than that of Massachusetts.

INDUSTRY SUPPORT

This new concept in auto insurance has backing from a large number of companies. In fact, insurance firms had a big hand in writing the new Massachusetts law, although now several companies have serious misgiving about some of its provisions.

Basically, the Massachusetts statute, signed into law August 17, does these things:

Requires that the companies holding the policies on the cars involved in an accident provide compensation for injuries to all occupants of the cars, including the drivers, regardless of which vehicle caused the crash.

51-148 0-70—17

Allows each occupant to collect up to $2,000 for medical expenses, lost wages and incidental costs.

Prevents a person involved in an accident from suing for such intangibles as "pain and suffering" unless his medical bills total more than $500, except in cases where the injury results in death, loss of a limb, or disfigurement. Reduces the cost of bodily-injury insurance, now required by law in Massachusetts, by 15 per cent.

If any accident victim's costs under this plan exceed the $2,000 limit, he can take legal action, as in the past on all such cases, to collect damages above that amount.

Damages to cars or other property are not affected by the new law.

Had the legislation included only these provisions, most insurance companies would have had no complaints. But the legislature ordered a 15 per cent reduction in rates the companies charge for all provisions in their auto policiesincluding car-repair coverage.

Major insurance companies that cover most of the State's 2.5 million drivers, who are compelled by law to carry auto insurance, balk at reducing their rates. The companies claim they are now losing money on their auto coverage and have asked the State to grant them rate increases.

LEGISLATIVE HASSLE

Many of the companies have threatened to stop writing auto insurance in Massachusetts unless the 15 per cent reduction is eliminated. The legislature has retaliated by passing a bill that would prevent the companies from selling any other type of insurance in the State if they drop auto coverage. The eight largest companies doing business in the State. told Governor Francis W. Sargent they will sue to test whether the rate cuts are legal.

The outcome of the squabble could have significance for people holding auto insurance policies in other sections of the country. Industry officials say the Massachusetts plan is considered a test case.

Actually, many companies have expressed interest in extending "no-fault” coverage far beyond the bodily injuries affected in Massachusetts.

Several States are taking a look at industry-backed plans that would make all auto insurance "no-fault."

The broader coverage would work this way:

Unlike the $2,000 limit set in Massachusetts, there would be no cutoff point for payments for bodily injury and other economic losses, but there might be some limit on payments for loss of wages.

Most important, damages to cars in accidents would be paid for by each driver's own insurance company with no one singled out for blame. This would do away with the red tape that can result when a faulty driver's insurance company must handle all damage claims.

No one in the insurance business will predict whether this form of insurance will spread across the nation in the near future. But many officials now believe it may be the way to hold down insurance costs.

Of course, not all firms agree. Some, including several large firms specializing in auto coverage, insist that insurance disputes should continue to be turned over to lawyers for settlement, in or out of court.

Despite these differing opinions, it is now clear that many insurance firms are willing to make changes in the way they insure motorists.

« PreviousContinue »