By DEVLIN BARRETT
The Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Lawmakers who waited three years for recommendations on how to make high-rises safer were unhappy to learn Wednesday that they will have to keep waiting months, if not years, to see if key changes are adopted.
Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., said the results of the three-year investigation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology did not offer immediate, practical help to builders.
“They did a remarkable job on forensic investigation,” said Weiner. “They’ve done a little too much hand-wringing and beard-stroking about what to do next. They seem a bit shy about specific recommendations,” he said.
NIST concluded, in recommendations released publicly in June, that high-rises should have sturdier stairwells and elevators capable of moving large numbers of people quickly. Also included in the 30 main recommendations were a call for buildings designed to better resist complete collapse, and development of more fire-resistant structures and building materials.
As part of their findings, investigators said most evacuation models for large buildings assume only one floor will need to be evacuated at a time, and consequently buildings aren’t designed to accommodate a massive exodus in the event of a major catastrophe.
If the World Trade Center towers had been full at the time they were attacked, as many as 14,000 people would have died, the institute concluded.
While members of the House Science Committee praised the agency for its detailed work, they also urged the agency Wednesday to move quicker to get building and fire code groups to adopt some of the recommended changes.
“I was hoping for a much more definitive checklist of ‘do’s and don’ts.’ New York City’s in the process now of rewriting building codes. For people who are looking to Washington for guidance, they’re going to be disappointed,” said Weiner.
Weiner and House Science Committee chairman Sherwood Boehlert, an upstate Republican, wrote the legislation that created the World Trade Center investigation.
“We’re impatient, understandably. A lot of people want action,” warned Boehlert.
NIST director William Jeffrey told Boehlert the agency would have specific recommendations ready by next March, though some recommendations would take longer.
“I believe the NIST recommendations do a very good job of defining what needs to get done,” said Jeffrey.
Henry Green, president of the International Code Council, a major industry group and a key player in any building code changes, said much more work needs to be done before NIST’s findings can be applied to real-world building practices.
“The recommendations are not written in a way that facilitates direct adoption and do need to be reframed in a manner that is specific,” Green told the House Science Committee.
An outside technical adviser to NIST said the agency is not aggressive enough to tackle a major forensic investigation, and recommended such work be moved to another part of the federal government.
“Instead of a gumshoe inquiry that left no stone unturned, I believe the investigations were treated more like research projects in which they waited for information to flow to them,” said Corbett, a professor of fire science at John Jay College in New York.
NIST’s findings are not binding on local building codes, but aimed to convince local authorities to adopt safer codes and practices.