Protective Glazing Council Fall Symposium Returns to Washington D.C. -- Only Online USGlass

Only Online - USGlass December 2006

Protective Glazing Council Fall Symposium Returns to Washington D.C.
by Brigid O'Leary

Members of the Protective Glazing Council (PGC) gathered at the Ronald Regan Building and International World Trade Center in Washington D.C., for the organization's Fall Symposium October 17-18. The program featured an impressive list of speakers, beginning with Major General Charles Williams of the Department of State Overseas Building Operations (OBO).

Williams took to the podium at 8:30 a.m. the first day, discussing the OBO's new construction program and recapping the design and construction of new embassies and consulates around the world. With 36 new embassies and consulates opened since 2001 and 40 more being built, Williams explained how the job gets done. Part of the efficiency of the building comes from the principals of performance, accountability, discipline and credibility, as a stressed within the OBO.

"This is what gives the organization the legs it has today," Williams said. "The world is in a very unsettled situation at the moment and, because of that, it makes our job tougher."

Embassies, Williams explained, are established anywhere the United States has citizens working.

"Pick anywhere in the world and we have something for you. We're not in pretty locations now because our people are where the action is and we have to go there and set things in place," he said, before showing a series of photos from different embassies around the world.

"When you hear 'embassy' you hear a lot of things and you know we have to secure the building. You may hear words like 'fortress' or 'bunkers,' [so] when I give these presentations, I try to clarify what we're doing," Williams said.

He explained that generally the OBO purchases ten acres of land at one time and prefers to build horizontally. They try to keep the buildings no higher than three stories, so as not to overshadow the tallest buildings in the city or draw attention to the facility. The designs don't shy away from glass either; several new embassies, including the one in Armenia, have atriums in the entrance. When asked his opinion of the buildings reflecting the philosophy of the United States, Williams indicated that he felt they already did-the buildings expressed openness without compromising the local flavor.

"There are a lot of misconceptions about what [presence] a building [has]. What presents a building is what you first see when you open your eyes and when you walk into the building. When you enter an embassy today, you don't see America. You see the host country décor. When people in Kenya [visit] the embassy in Nairobi, they see the American flag, but they walk in and see bamboo floors, not oak. They can relate to that," he said. He added that local laborers are hired to do the building, which also adds to the economy-and the United States always replants indigenous trees.

"Terrorism is a Tactic"
The tone of the conference changed a bit when Buck Revell of the Revell Group made his presentation immediately following Williams' speech. Revell spoke about terrorism, its causes and the changes of which companies offering protective services should be aware. Specifically, he pointed out that terrorist plots against the United States are not new and should not have been a surprise.

The United States has been a target of Islamic terrorists since 1979 when the Ayatollah Khomeini came out of exile, he explained. Since that time-the same time the group Hezbollah was created-terrorist groups have blatantly expressed the desire to take down the United States.

"It should not have been a surprise to us when, on 9/11, the United States was attacked so successfully by a group that had been telling us, loudly and clearly for a long time, that they were out to get us," he said.

Complicating the problem is the nature of terrorism.

"It's not a war. Terrorism is a tactic. It's a tactic used to disrupt a society for political or other purposes," Revell said.

He added that Al-Qaeda and the Taliban have been contained for the most part. The bigger threat now, he explained is "more the lone wolf operations that are energized by propaganda and … religious fervor. That is the most difficult type of terrorism to stop. If you don't have a target, it's hard to penetrate."

He stressed that Islmaic jihadists, those the public most closely associates with terrorism, are not mainstream Muslims and that terrorism can come in many forms.

"It's equally a concern with homegrown terrorists who may be second- or third-generation people born here who have gotten caught up with the religious fervor. [Timothy] McVeigh was not an Islamic terrorist … but he had a target of the U.S. government and [blew up] a building that had nothing to do with his cause, but that he saw as a representative of it. Homegrown terrorists, whatever their reasons, will continue to be the threat," Revell said.

He indicated that terrorism will not go away any time soon.

"This is not a two- or three-year episode we're dealing with. We'll be dealing with it for the next two, three, maybe four generations," he said.

After a short break, attendees returned to listen to a presentation by Dean C. Alexander, in which he discussed new potential targets for blast events and what businesses can-and are-doing to mitigate the potential for danger in these areas. Alexander, professor of Homeland Security at Western Illinois University and author of Terrorism and Business: The Impact of September 11, 2001, expanded upon Revell's presentation stressing the involvement and cooperation needed between the private and public sector in working to prevent terrorist attacks.

He also spoke to the changes in modus operandi of terrorist attacks: the use of people considered outside the "traditional" terrorist profile, such as women and children, staging attacks geared toward greater casualties or using drastically different weapons or methods. He gave a general overview of targets that aren't on the forefront of people's minds, such as retail areas and medical facilities.

Switching Focus
After lunch, the topic turned from manmade destruction to natural disasters. Jaime Gascon with the Miami-Dade County Building Code Compliance Department made a presentation that looked at some of the damage done by Hurricane Wilma last year and what has happened with the building codes since that time.

He pointed out that it may seem odd that the codes were written in 2006, go through discussion in 2007 and, if approved or accepted, go into effect in 2008, but that's the way it normally goes. Gascon also showed aftermath pictures of four buildings that are located near one another and described what caused the damage in the buildings; the damage to the upper floors of one building more than 30 stories tall was actually caused by the flying glass from a nearby building, the design of which created a tunnel effect that funneled the debris toward the taller building.

"What you have here is glass breaking glass and it all raining down on the streets below," Gascon said. He pointed out that some designers consider the outboard lite of an insulating glass unit a "sacrifice lite," but that, if that outboard lite is annealed and is compromised in a storm, it creates a safety hazard due to the shards of glass falling.

During the question and answer period, Gascon explained that the building codes do not and probably never will specifically require laminated glass; rather, he said, the codes will expect a certain standard of work and its up to the industry-the architects, the glass manufacturers, suppliers and builders-to decide the best way to meet those standards.

Following Gascon, John Talkington of the Smithsonian Institution took his audience through the planning and implementation process that has taken place at the Smithsonian Institution.

Talkington described the shift in purpose of the Smithsonian since the events of September 11, 2001-no longer is the focus on protecting the artwork, artifacts and visitors from petty crimes (pickpockets, small-scale theft), but now the focus is on protecting everyone from larger threats.

He outlined the process that the organization undertook for the retrofit projects, which included regular and open communication between the organization, the contractors and the staff at each of the facilities. The communication with the staff members was important, Talkington explained, because it helped them know what was happening and why. The planning process also took on a sizeable roll, as many Smithsonian buildings themselves are pieces of history that had to be preserved and the retrofit applications were customized according to the age of the building.

Wrapping up the Tuesday meeting was Bill Koffel with Koffel and Associates, who talked about the different applications and standards governing the use of fire-rated and fire-protection glass. Koffel serves as a codes consultant for the Glazing Industry Code Committee.

Of note, he said that wired glass was used in the past as fire-rated glass because, at one time, it was the only thing available that provided such protection. Koffel also pointed out that while wired glass is tested for impact, it was rarely tested to withstand the force of impact to which it can be subjected in gymnasiums and places of education. This has led to lawsuits and political action taken by families who have had children injured in accidents with wired glass in recent years.

Where the Winds Blow
Wednesday's seminars got under way with Dan Kelly of Applied Research Associates (ARA) who provided a recap of studies ARA did on the Dan M. Russell Jr. Federal Building and Courthouse in Gulfport, Miss. (see related article in the October 2006 USGlass, page 66). The building was constructed according to ISC Design criteria for bomb blasts and subsequently was subjected to the winds and rain of Hurricane Katrina.

Kelly reported that, "It performed much better than similar buildings in the area. Interesting things we did see while we were there-the windows themselves performed really well."

Of importance, Kelly noted that staff had boarded up the streetside windows on the first two floors of the courthouse with plywood-all they were able to get done before they evacuated-but did not protect the windows that faced the courtyard.

"They did not protect windows on the interior courtyard, and they were all broken by the gravel from the roof," Kelly said.

Kelly said ARA estimated that 10 percent of original construction costs losses were avoided in hurricane Katrina at the Gulfport courthouse due to installation of blast-resistant windows.

"Blast-resistant windows significantly reduced damage that would have occurred in hurricane Katrina had the courthouse not had any protective glazing," he said.

After a short break, Bob Ford with Solutia made his presentation about glazing solutions for hurricane prone regions. Acknowledging that he was facing many of the same attendees who had heard the presentation in Chicago in March, Ford incorporated updates about the status of building code implementation in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, sharing how much had-and hadn't-changed in six months.

"It's been a positive now that there are code changes going into effect to save lives and protect property from storms," said Ford.

Louisiana has accepted codes and Mississippi has codes that are pending approval and implementation.

Touching on some of the same topics that Gascon discussed the day before, Ford delved deeper into the testing to which glazing systems are subjected.

Rounding out the morning seminars, Wade Belcher with the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) made his presentation "Design and Construction for Extreme Forces."

"Going back to the Murrow building [in Oklahoma City], we were primarily concerned that we got the building done on time and within budget, because we thought most of our buildings were benign. We all remember what happened on April 19," he said. When given the task of determining how to make government buildings more secure, many of the responses the GSA received were to shrink the size of windows even as small as ship portholes.

Belcher, who has spoken before the PGC many times before, said he and the lead architect at the GSA at the time did not subscribe to that school of thought and Belcher used his presentation to "show where we have been able to go with your products, your solutions [and] the design flexibility that we've been able to have for our buildings because of your products."

Keeping the names of many of the buildings secrets, he explained some of the thoughts that went into the building design and safety features that each building offered-and often worked in kudos for his audience for helping make the projects possible.

"The designers have the flexibility to do what they do because of what you, the manufacturers and suppliers, can give us. We can go further than any of us have imagined," he said.

Before closing his presentation, Belcher also announced his upcoming retirement, effective the first of the year.

That afternoon, John Abruzzo with Thronton Tomasetti took to the podium. In his presentation he discussed what he has found to be the most important aspects of working with and especially advising commercial clients who are designing new buildings or planning upgrades to their current facilities.

"The problem is, we have no building code requirements for blast, and by blast I mean anti-terrorist codes," he said. For those involved in the planning aspect, he suggested the use of existing codes from federal agencies, such as FEMA 426 and FEMA 427.

Most importantly, he advised, was for architects, designers and suppliers to stay involved with the project even after the initial recommendations have been issued.

"Present [a recommendation] to [a client] and they probably won't understand 90 percent of it. So you need to follow up and make sure they're following along with it. … Why? Because things change. Things are changing all the time. Technology has been changing over the last five years as far as what's available. Manufacturing issues may arise. What typically happens is that existing things aren't what you thought they were," he said.

When he opened the floor to questions, Abruzzo was asked what prompted most of his customers to look into securing their buildings if there were no codes or mandates requiring a level of protection or protective glazing. He answered directly: the fear of litigation.

"Liability. What are they liable for? What we've found is that this is more the case in New York, where they think they have more of a potential threat. We see less of it in Philadelphia for glazing but more for structure. They don't see themselves as being under as much of a threat."

There are different kinds of threats, of course, and most of the crowd at the conference stayed to hear the last speaker, Ron Waranowski, discuss one of the more frequently overlooked threats: electromagnetic attacks. Specifically, Waranowski renewed and updated his presentation on the need for electromagnetic countermeasures.
"Globalization has occurred down to the individual level," he began, explaining that we are more and more "connected" due to advances such as Blue Tooth and WiFi technology.

"In five years you won't be able to have a computer with a wire hanging out of it. BlueTooth with steroids is coming," he said.

After showing his audience a chart of the electromagnetic spectrum and where different devices we use daily are in relation to one another (CB radios are stronger than AM or FM radio, but cell phones are stronger than CB radios), Waranowski explained that electronic security is not always what it seems.

"If you want to steal information, don't worry about figuring out the encryption, sit outside and figure out how to break into the 2.5 connection," he said.

Part of the challenge for builders-and consequently, the protective glazing industry-is that windows are very electromagnetically "open," making options for clear radio frequency and infrared barriers a relatively unchartered territory for protective glazing.

"Certain low-E glasses give you some attenuation. Radio frequency barriers-security by denial-we need to lock the glazing systems down by perspective," Waranowski said.

While the threats of system hacking and electronic eavesdropping may seem like something only exclusive groups would worry about, such as the government, Waranowski also told audience members to check their corporate insurance policies carefully.

"[Some] insurance companies are not covering damage to your electronic assets due to electromagnetic interference," he warned.

Brigid O'Leary is a contributing writer to USGlass magazine.