Uniform Construction Code: One Year Later
A year has passed since the Department of Labor & Industry (L&I) and local governments began implementing the Pennsylvania Construction Code Act (Act 45 of 1999) and the regulations implementing the Act, 34 Pa Code Chapters 401, 403 and 405. Called the "Uniform Construction Code" (UCC), Pennsylvania's first statewide building code requirements apply to both residential and commercial construction, and affect not only new construction, but also the repair, alteration and any change in the use of all existing buildings.
Before implementation there was much concern and some negativity pertaining to the implementation of the UCC. However, the Rendell Administration was committed from day one to make available all necessary assistance so that municipalities would make an informed decision relative to participation. Since implementation, the Rendell Administration has worked with all local governments to ensure the UCC provides uniformity on all construction work throughout Pennsylvania without minimizing safety. Now is a good time to step back and reflect on what actually transpired and what issues need to be addressed for the continued success of this new and complicated program.
One of the major "unknowns" at the time of passage of the UCC enabling legislation in November 1999 was the extent to which municipalities would opt to participate in this program. L&I’s best estimate in 2001 projected that at least half of the state's 2,565 municipalities would elect not to be involved in enforcing the new building code.
At the end of the official municipal election period, August, 2004, it was obvious that municipal interest was extremely high, as only 330 municipalities opted not to enforce the code. Since the initial election period ended, a number of municipalities have altered their decisions, so the current opt-in/opt-out status is:
- 2,309 municipalities have opted to administer and enforce the UCC (90%)
- 256 municipalities have elected not to enforce the UCC
Additional municipalities have notified the Department that they intend to alter their initial decisions. Most of these are deciding to opt-in, in fact only one has opted-out.
Another subject of much speculation was the availability of sufficient numbers of credentialed code officials and third party agencies to perform UCC plan reviews and inspections. As of this writing, L&I has credentialed the following numbers of persons and agencies:
- 2,836 Certified Code Officials
- 2,376 Registered (temporarily grandfathered) Code Officials
- 153 Certified Third Party Agencies
The supply of code officials appears to be ample. Of course, an important related issue is the level of code knowledge and enforcement ability of these persons and agencies. Only anecdotal information concerning this issue is available at this time. Not unexpectedly, this information suggests that the level of ability is highest in those jurisdictions where there were pre-UCC code requirements and where code enforcement was taken seriously.
Another looming issue is whether most of the registered code officials will obtain the certifications required for them to continue working in 2007 and 2009 (the end of grandfathering periods for residential and commercial code officials).
At the outset, many questioned the ability of local governments to adequately implement the UCC and to enforce the code. This concern still exists today.
Since August 2004, L&I has received numerous complaints (by telephone or e-mail) about local code officals' interpretation of the UCC codes and standards. L&I’s position has been to decline to interpose its views, and instead has advised complainants to petition the local appeals board (the body that is authorized to resolve conflicts over code interpretations and to grant variances).
In accordance with the Regulations, L&I is charged with investigating only written formal complaints about code official actions. To date, L&I has received numerous complaints on the telephone, but only about 25 written complaints. All but one was resolved without a formal investigation by field staff.
Some of the alleged issues and irregularities will be addressed when L&I begins its review of how municipalities have legally enforced the UCC's accessibility requirements; performed plan review and inspection duties. UCC regulation requires L&I to evaluate performance of all enforcing municipalities at least once every five years. L&I’s procedures for these reviews have been finalized, and field inspectors will begin their first audits of opt-in municipalities in late summer, 2005.
As indicated previously, where building codes were previously enforced, issues seem to be minimal. Where issues still exist, the most frequently received complaints are:
1. Municipalities (especially smaller ones) do not have personnel who understand their
responsibilities under the UCC.
- Code Officials are approving plans (especially commercial) with little or no
review.
- Code officials do not understand UCC changes made by the Legislature in 2004
or requirements found in new codes.
- No appeals board has been established, to hear variance requests or to provide
means of appealing code officials' decisions.
- Forms and application procedures are in some cases non-existent and in other
cases, do not comply with the UCC regulations.
2. In opt-out municipalities, residential property owners are required to obtain approvals on
their own.
3. In opt-out municipalities, there is no statutory provision for an appeals board to deal with
residential code issues.
4. In opt-out municipalities, Act 45 makes no provision for enforcement when a residential
property owner performs work without a permit. As a result, municipal officials do not
have a remedy.
5. There is confusion over how to treat existing buildings that should have complied with
previous State and local construction code requirements.
6. Municipal fees (which often are directly related to the fees charged by third party
agencies that are performing plan review and inspections under contract with the
municipality) are too expensive.
UCC regulations do not specify fees (except for those that L&I charges). The only requirement imposed on municipalities is to establish and publish its fee schedules.
I believe a good start has been made, largely because of efforts made by Pennsylvania's local government associations, the Departments of Community & Economic Development and Labor & Industry, together with the Pennsylvania Chapters of the International Code Council. I commend all those who have worked to make the transition to the UCC as efficient as possible for all involved. L&I will continue to do its part to make sure issues are resolved, municipalities have the best tools to make the process operate, and development is not unnecessarily delayed. |
