Less than two hours after terrorists attacked the World Trade Center towers in New York on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, the buildings lay crumbled in pieces on the ground below. Engineers had designed the structures to withstand catastrophic events, such as earthquakes and even small plane crashes. But no one planned for a commercial airplane full of jet fuel careening into either of the buildings. And even if they did, experts believe nobody could have designed a building that would withstand the extreme heat and fire that would follow such a crash.

According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) recent investigation into the collapses, the impact of the jetliners severely damaged several of the columns at the core of each building and dislodged fireproofing on both the columns and floors. According to its report, this caused the buildings to founder. And NIST–a non-regulatory government organization that recommends standards for a variety of industries–is doing its part to see that such a catastrophic collapse doesn't happen again.

As a result of its investigation, the NIST has proposed building code changes to states and local agencies. According to the NIST, these changes would improve the safety of tall buildings, the buildings' occupants and, in the event of an emergency, first responders.

“There is no building that has ever been built that is bomb-proof, nor will there ever be,” says Roy A. Powell, a partner in Jones Day's Pittsburgh office specializing in building and construction law. “But the NIST learned through its investigation that there are things that can be done to make buildings safer, especially tall buildings.”

The NIST's proposed building code changes are only recommendations. At press time, state and local agencies hadn't decided what portions of the recommended codes to adopt. But experts believe building codes across the nation will change to some degree because of the recommendations. And that means corporations will have to foot the bill for some potentially costly renovations.

A Nightmare's Aftermath

In August 2002 the NIST began its investigation into the World Trade Center disaster. The agency spent nearly three years going over the details of the day's events in New York to determine what caused the buildings to collapse.

“While the buildings were able to withstand the initial impact of the aircraft, the resulting fires that spread through the towers weakened support columns and floors that had fireproofing dislodged by the impacts,” said Dr. Shyam Sunder, the NIST's lead investigator and deputy director of its Building and Fire Research Laboratory, in a statement. “This eventually led to the collapse as the perimeter columns were pulled inward by sagging floors and buckled.”

According to the report, had the fireproofing remained in place, the fires would have burned out or moved on without weakening key elements needed to keep the building standing.

The NIST concluded in its 10,000-page report that newly developed fireproofing could have sustained the structure longer, possibly saving more lives.

Additionally, the agency said less people would have died if the building had more than three stairwells and the walls in the stairwells were made with heavier drywall.

“If a plane full of jet fuel crashes into a building, it produces a 1,300-degree fire. Anything will give way to that eventually,” says Robert L. Meyers III, of counsel at Jones Day in Dallas and a specialist in construction law. “But it's a matter of using materials that will resist that kind of extreme heat longer than the materials used to build the towers.”

Making Changes

When construction was completed on the World Trade Center towers in 1973, industry experts considered the buildings state-of-the-art.

“They were fully equipped with sprinklers and had all the required safety measures in place–plus some,” Powell says. But since then, construction engineers have created more fire-resistant building materials, such as special kinds of concrete that help protect steel building frames from severe fire damage.

The NIST took these new developments into consideration when it began its investigation in 2002. As a result, its recommendations included specific improvements to building standards, codes and practices; changes to evacuation and emergency response procedures; and research to help prevent future building failures.

In its proposed changes, the NIST recommends that companies better educate their employees about how to escape a building in the event of an emergency and implement better emergency communications systems. It also urges engineers and architects to design buildings with stronger, more fire-tolerant materials; use spray-applied fire-resistant materials; and, in the construction of new high-rises, find new methods for designing structures to resist fires.

“NIST's recommended code changes would prevent 'progressive collapse' and reduce the buildingwide effect of fires,” says Carl Gebo, partner at Powell Goldstein in Atlanta. Progressive collapse is the continuous sequence of failures caused by the failure of one part of the structure. In the case of the World Trade Center towers the dislodged fireproofing started their progressive collapses.

The NIST divided its recommendations into eight groups: increased structural integrity, enhanced fire resistance of structures, new methods for fire resistance, active fire protection, improved building evacuation, improved emergency response, improved procedures and practices, and education and training.

The recommendations focus on any building taller than 20 stories or any building, regardless of size, that could be a potential target for a terrorist attack. (The NIST was unclear on whether the rules would apply to existing buildings, as well as new construction.) The new codes called for such measures as “a nationwide adoption of standards and codes to prevent progressive collapse” and “improved occupant preparedness through joint and nationwide public educational campaigns.”

Some industry experts are concerned that the proposed changes go too far.

“I can envision all kinds of extreme solutions that would be so expensive and so difficult to bring about that they would be impractical,” Meyers says. “There are certain things companies can do relatively inexpensively now with techniques and materials available.”

And now may be the time to do those things.

Industry Impact

At press time, no one was certain about what the final rules would look like. Experts believe the building and construction industries will be the first to feel the impact if regulators adopt the codes because the onus will be on them to ensure the changes are properly implemented. But the new codes could affect companies in almost any industry.

Some experts argue a company's reluctance to proactively make changes in its building's structure and in its safety-education program could leave it open to potential lawsuits in the event of an accident or terrorist attack.

“Anyone who owns or develops a building now arguably could be charged with the lessons learned from this NIST report,” Gebo explains. “So even if these changes don't get implemented into specific building codes, theoretically someone could sue a company that didn't make changes based on a negligence standard.”

Meyers agrees, claiming creative plaintiffs' lawyers would probably find some grounds for suit. But Powell believes that's unlikely to happen.

“Building owners are increasingly heightening security at entrances and putting up cameras in buildings and parking garages,” he says. “And as for a jet loaded with fuel flying into a building, I don't think there is anything anyone could do to the codes to change the outcome of that scenario.”

For now, what companies can do, experts agree, is ensure they are in compliance with current building codes, increase security measures if necessary and pay close attention to the outcome of the NIST's proposed changes.

“Chances are very good that some of these proposed ideas will become code,” Meyers explains. “Companies need to stay on top of the progress and understand that, if it becomes a requirement, they may have some expensive changes to make to their buildings.”

In late September, the NIST held a conference in Maryland at which it planned to finalize the proposed changes to the codes. After that, it will be up to states and local municipalities to decide if they want to adopt the changes.

“It's still very early in the game,” Gebo says. “But one thing's for sure, one way or another, these codes are going to change as a result of Sept. 11. And it's important that everyone knows what to expect.”