the wage scale specified in this Agreement, the higher wage scale of the job site Union shall be paid to the journeymen employed on such work in the home shop or sent to the job site.

SECTION 3. The provisions of Section 2 of this Article, Section 2 of Article II and Section 1 of Article III shall not be applicable to the manufacture for sale to the trade or purchase of the following items:

1. Ventilators

2. Louvers

3. Automatic fire dampers

4. Radiator and air conditioning unit enclosures

5. Fabricated pipe and fittings for residential installations only

6. Mixing (attenuation) boxes

7. Plastic skylights

8. Air diffusers, grilles, registers

9. Sound attenuators

SECTION 4. The provision of Section 2 of this Article shall not be applicable to the manufacture for sale to the trade or purchase of PLENUMS-Double wall panels for use in construction of air housing.

SECTION 5. Except as provided in Sections 2 and 6 of this Article, the Employer agrees that journeymen sheet metal workers hired outside of the territorial jurisdiction of this Agreement shall receive the wage scale and working condi tions of the local Agreement covering the territory in which such work is performed or supervised.

SECTION 4. It is agreed by both parties to this Agreement that if the party of the first part (Sheet Metal Contractors) is unable or refuses to figure work that belongs to the members of the Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, that the Sheet Metal Workers' Local Union No. 223 has the right to place sheet metal workers on these jobs. In order that the Sheet Metal Contractors' may be familiar with all types of work which has been given the Sheet Metal Workers' by Building and Construction Trades Department, Local Union No. 223 shall furnish the party of the first part with a copy of these awards.

SECTION 5. The Union agrees to furnish weekly to the Health and Welfare Trustees, the names of all Employers to which it furnished men, whether under the terms of this Agreement or otherwise.

ARTICLE XXX

SECTION 1. It is expressly agreed and included herein, for the purpose of more specifically but not by any means a limitation, that the following supplement to Article I of the Standard Form of Union Agreement shall be amended to include the furnishing of all integral components and any and all necessary fabrication. SECTION 2. The employer, when accepting any contract or authorization to perform any job site or project work under the trade jurisdiction of the Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, shall be required to bid in a lump sum and man all of the work on that individual portion of the job, or on that individual portion of the construction project, which embraces and includes the fabrication on the job and installation of all materials and work that comes within the trade jurisdiction of Sheet Metal Workers' International Association.

SECTION 3. If all of the work on that Individual Portion of the construction project as defined in Section (2) above is not awarded to the Employer, then the Employer shall not accept a contract to perform a lesser portion of the work on that construction project.

SECTION 4. The intent of this provision shall include and extend to all work within the trade jurisdiction of Sheet Metal Workers' International Association which requires a composite crew under International Agreements, or under local agreements, with other International Associations, or with other Local Unions, and the fact that another union may be assigned part of the work shall not excuse the employer from failing to bid as outlined above and insist on the right to bid for such individual portion of the work, job or contract.

SECTION 5. The failure of the general contractor, owner, or other employer from whom the employer hereunder receives his contract or right to grant the entire individual portion of the contract to this employer shall not excuse the employer hereunder from observing all of the provisions of this Article.

SECTION 6. In the event of a dispute concerning the application of this provision of the contract, Business Manager and Business Representatives of the

Union, shall be allowed, upon request to examine the contract or contracts involved, the purchase order or invoice or any other document for the purchase or manufacture of disputed work or materials.

SECTION 7. No Employer shall accept or perform work covered by this Agreement, on any construction project, from any Contractor whose prime business is mechanical or sheet metal work, unless that Contractor has a collective bargaining agreement with this Union.

Definitions

For the purpose of this Agreement, a single dwelling residence home: Shall not include high rise apartments, condominium apartments, industrial or commercial buildings or any other buildings of similar types.

The word lump used in Article XXX Section 2 shall be defined as Definition 2-B of lump by Webster's new Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 1956, G & C Merriam Company, The Riverside Press, Cambridge, Mass. The whole aggregation, collection lot "as taken in the lump."

The word individual used in Article XXX Sections 2, 3, 4, 5 shall be defined as (a) not divisible, (b) inseparable, (c) identical, by Webster's new Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 1956, G & C Merriam Company, The Riverside Press, Cambridge, Mass.

The word portion used in Article XXX Sections 2, 3, 4, 5 shall be defined as (a) an allotted part, by Webster's new Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 1956, G&C Merriam Company, The Riverside Press, Cambridge, Mass.

For the purpose of this Agreement and for the purpose of lump sum bidding, individual portion shall be an allotted part of a job or project site that is not divisible in any manner.

Air conditioning, ventilation, and/or exhaust systems together shall all be considered one individual portion of a job or project site.

The fabrication and installation of all flashings, metal skylights, scuppers, pitch pans, roof expansion joints, gutters (excluding half round) and downspouts together shall be considered one individual portion of a job or project site.

For the purpose of this Agreement a shop is a sheet metal business that is properly equipped and manned to fabricate materials for any given job.

(a) General

ARTICLE XXXI

1. The use of conduit and flexible hose is divided into two categories. A. Airtight (high pressure)

B. Conventional

2. The classification of a system, for this purpose, will not be determined by static pressure or velocity, but rather by the following requirements:

A. A high pressure system will have airtight duct work of special construction. It will be made airtight by mechanical means such as welding, gasketing and/or caulking.

B. In addition, for a system to be considered high pressure it must have pressure reduction devices such as one of the following:

a Pressure reducing valve with lined duct.

b. Pressure reducing valve with sound trap.

e. Attentuation box with pressure reducing valve.

d. Double duct, or mixing box with valves.

e. Peripheral high velocity system.

3. Any supply system that does not have both airtight construction and a pressure reduction device will be considered a conventional system.

4. The requirements in Paragraph No. 2 above, refer to both supply and return systems, except in addition to the aforementioned, a high velocity return system must have metal flues or metal risers to be considered high pressure, and be of airtight construction to qualify.

(b) Conventional systems

1. The use of conduit is not permitted in a conventional system.

2. Flex Hose shall not replace the fabricated fitting and/or fittings at the outlet, and shall not exceed seven (7) feet in length in any one branch or take-off line. 3. Flex Hose shall not be used as a trunk line of any system.

4. Flex Hose shall not be used in primary air, fresh air, or exhaust systems.

RECESS

Senator TOWER. The committee will come to order.

The last witness for this morning is Mr. Donald Chapman, member of the National Society of Professional Engineers and the Consulting Engineers Council of the United States.

Mr. Chapman, you may read your statement in full. You may submit it for the record. It will be printed in full, and you can proceed to summarize or discuss it informally or any basis you choose.

STATEMENT OF DONALD L. CHAPMAN, MEMBER, NATIONAL SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS COUNCIL OF THE UNITED STATES

Mr. CHAPMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will read the majority of it. There are some modifications made for clarity that I hope will help you.

The engineering profession sincerely appreciates this opportunity to present its views on S. 3373. The problems which this measure seeks to overcome constitute both a threat and an obstacle to the construction industry in general and to housing in particular.

I am a consulting engineer and vice president of the architectural and engineering firm of Grover Dimond Associates, Inc., of St. Paul, Minn. Our firm provides technical and design services in the fields of civil, structural, mechanical, electrical, and industrial engineering. I appear before you today, however, as spokesman for two national engineering associations the Consulting Engineers Council of the United States, which represents approximately 2,500 private practice engineering companies, and the National Society of Professional Engineers, which has more than 65,000 individual engineer members.

Engineers play a key role in the design and construction of housing. My own firm, for example, provides services ranging from master planning to pollution abatement.

By virtue of their involvement, engineers are concerned with meeting today's (and tomorrow's) housing needs. We know that some 10 million U.S. families cannot afford adequate housing. The steadily rising cost of new, or remodeled, accommodations-up 13 percent since last year-indicates that the situation probably will worsen before it improves. Accordingly, we are convinced that all potential avenues for reducing housing costs deserve careful consideration.

One method of holding the line is to reduce the cost of labor and materials while maintaining or improving quality. There are frequent opportunities for accomplishing this goal, including development and utilization of technological advances in the home building industry. One promising process is "Optimum Value Engineering"OVE-in which engineering design changes are weighed against the problems of costs, codes, trade practices, installation time, market acceptance, and quality achieved.

Through OVE, engineers have found that reliance upon smaller and fewer, but stronger, structural members can lead to lighter structures thus requiring more modest footings and foundations. About one-third of the concrete usually used for foundations is generally suflicient.

Similarly, engineers are finding that use of adhesives rather than nails can speed construction, as do metal drywall clips instead of the more common, and more costly, wood blocking. Fiberglass bathtubs, prefabricated plumbing walls, plastic, drainpipe, prefinished windows and door units, and prewired electrical switch boxes-already mounted on asbestos panels are just a few of the ideas incorporated into one 952-square-foot OVE prototype house which resulted in a reduction of $1,652 over cost of a more traditionally designed and constructed house. Less labor, hence lower labor costs, represented $506 or almost onethird of the savings.

Unfortunately, it may be impossible to utilize these and similar economies in the millions of housing units which must be built in the coming decade. Despite the obvious benefits of large-scale prefabrication, two things-local building code restrictions and union insistence. upon work preservation agreements in labor contracts-presently constitute a "Sword of Damocles" over every designer and builder. Årchitects and engineers are understandably hesitant to specify time and money-saving materials or components which a local code may prohibit or, even worse, which may not even be installed after assembly and shipment to the project site.

On the first of these two problems, real progress is finally being made toward alleviation of code restrictions.

Previously, even the most modern local codes failed to provide for evaluating truly innovative building materials and methods. They were, instead, oriented to certain specific and familiar methods (and materials) of construction. Each was, it seems, incompatible with any other.

Thanks to the National Council of State Building Codes and Standards (NCSBCS), coordination and consolidation of codes is approaching reality. NCSBCS provides a vehicle, through which conflicting local codes are being brought together and differences eliminated.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development is presently developing, with the joint assistance of the National Bureau of Standards and private industry, a set of criteria based upon performance. These criteria evaluate standards of comfort and utility as well as the usual structural, electrical, and mechanical requirements. When completed, the "guide criteria," as it has come to be known, should not be regarded as a building code but it can serve as experimental design parameters based upon performance.

Even more heartening has been the action by several States-20 at last count-which have passed industrialized housing laws, or general purpose building codes, which preempt local regulations for industrialized housing that meets established State standards.

The engineering profession, however, believes that more equitable and informed use of building codes will be further encouraged by enactment of S. 3373. In so doing, however, we believe the House and Senate should make it clear that this legislation is in no way intended to provide a vehicle by which the Federal Government, and particularly the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, may become a "national czar" of building codes and standards. The intent of this legislation, plainly and simply, is to assure that qualified, tested, new materials, or prefabricated com

ponents may be purchased and installed on those projects where they have been specified by the responsible architect or engineer. Obviously, as designers of projects, A-E's have a personal interest in assuring satisfactory construction and operation.

On the matter of union reluctance to use new and innovative techniques, court decisions and rulings upholding labor restrictions against certain building products or materials have sparked widespread alarm among engineers. We refer, of course. to labor groups' insistence upon contract provisions which prohibit installation-or even handling of prefabricated components that may eliminate work that tradesmen have historically provided at job sites.

With full respect for the workingman's apprehension over anything which infringes upon his right to earn a living, we also recog nize the importance of cost reductions, improving quality, and speeding completion of projects. During these presentations, your subcommittee has heard, or will hear, of numerous incidents involving union refusal to install prevalved boilers, prefinished doors, prewired switchboxes, prefabricated air filter units, and dozens of other cost-saving components.

In my own firm we specified a certain type of high velocity duct work as part of the HVAC system on the Northern Federal Bank Building in St. Paul. To assure adherence to design criteria, our plans called for duct work manufactured by any one of three companies. Sheet Metal Workers Local No. 76, of St. Paul, challenged our "or equal" specifications on the basis that the contractor, in using the prefabricated duct work, was violating a "work preservation' clause in his labor agreement. The Sheet Metal Workers took that position despite the fact, by their own admission, the employing contractor had not previously constructed, or fabricated, "doubled-walled, internally insulated, high velocity ducts and fittings" as specified and there were no other facilities in the Twin Cities area which had the capacity or equipment to produce the spun fittings or oval duct work as required by our firm's plans.

In effect, we were being told that we could not specify the type of duct work we felt was best suited for this project, even though the client was relying upon us to assure the subsequent satisfactory operation of his system. Fortunately, the Board of Arbitration, to which this argument was referred, ruled in our favor and our right to control the specifications was upheld under binding arbitration. Members of our firm testified at that arbitration hearing.

To our knowledge this is the only such case to come before an arbitration board. In numerous other disagreements, the same question of "right of control"-whether or not the design architect-engineer or the building trades union should dictate what products or materials are utilized on a project-have been decided both ways. It is expected that this issue must eventually be resolved permanently by the U.S. Supreme Court. In the meantime, lack of legislation, such as S. 3373, leaves the issue open to disagreement and permits labor disputes which, in terms of hard feelings and delays, more than offset the potential gains of "Optimum Value Engineering-OVE.”

Several man-weeks of work can be lost when (as actually happened) bricklayers near Milpitas, Calif., sought to block use of prefabricated fireplaces on approximately 1,500 homes being built on three large