The latest update from the Department of Labor & Industry's website and revised requirements for when it has jurisdiction.
The latest municipal amendment summary
Two new TPAs
Perhaps most importantly, information on HB1507, which attempts to address the issue of illegally occupied structures prior to UCC adoption.
UPDATE TO LABOR & INDUSTRY WEBSITE
Much of this information was posted and reported upon previously in a PABCO update, but since the Department just published it today as an update on its site, the entire announcement is reprinted immediately below.
CLICK HERE to link directly to the Update Page at the Department of Labor and Industry
MAY 23, 2005:
Manufactured Housing (please note that PABCO had asked the Manufactured Housing Division of the Department of Community and Economic Development to review this advisory to determine if it considers the advisory to be accurate and in keeping with information that DCED has been providing to Building Code Officials pursuant to Act 158 of 2004. Mark Conte of DCED has stated that he finds the Advisory to be acceptable and consistent with advice that his division has been providing to BCOs....Editor)
An advisory has been added to this website indicating the extent to which the UCC applies to new manufactured housing and any changes to these units, i.e., when they are altered, added on to, relocated or repaired. Click here to access the Advisory on Manufactured Housing.
Department’s Plan Review and Inspection Requirements (Buildings)
The UCC-3 APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT has been modified, in part, to facilitate clerical staff review of application packages to determine administrative completeness.
Questions related to different additional submissions that might be required are now on the first page.
The form now has a box on page 3 where applicants must indicate whether any deferred submissions are involved.
In response to applicants' frequent failure to provide the seal of the design professional in responsible charge on this form, we have added language emphasizing that this is required, and the box for the seal now contains the word "SEAL."
Because of the changes made to the UCC-3 form, we have also revised the UCC-2 UCC PLAN REVIEW CHECKLIST. Some of the checklist items have been moved to the APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT; we have also added a “not applicable” checkbox next to the non-mandatory section titles (so that applicants do not have to check all of the individual items under each section to indicate that none of the items apply to the proposed work).
The section on Plan Revisions (N) has been substantially altered, to reflect the Department’s policy concerning the deferred submission of fire alarm, sprinkler and truss system drawings and information.
A new section "I" has been added to specify the Department’s requirements for the use and occupancy residential dwellings for the provision of day care services. Also available in this section is the department’s new form, the UCC-24 APPLICATION FOR IN-HOME DAY CARE PERMIT, in an interactive format. Note that this form is only for use where the department has jurisdiction.
Department’s Plan Review and Inspection Requirements (Elevators and lifting devices)
A whole new section pertaining to elevator and lifting devices has been added to the Building Codes website. This section includes three new application forms, directions for filling them out, and other information that customers need to comply with the UCC requirements pertaining to this work.
Click here for the most current information as of May 23, 2005.
Take note that Whitpain Twp., Montgomery County, is the first municipality to appeal the decision of the Secretary of Labor and Industry to the Court of Common Pleas. A hearing is scheduled for June 9th. Upon challenge, after initial approval of the Department that the proposed ordinance met the "equal to or more restrictive requirement" in the UCC amendment process, The Secretary ruled that unique and compelling circumstances did not exist in the township for the ordinance with the UCC amendment to stand.
A hearing is still scheduled for June 15th in the Adams County Court of Common Pleas. In this case, the Secretary ruled that the Borough of Carroll Valley does have unique and compelling circumstances to allow their UCC amended ordinance to stand, and the Secretary's ruling is being challenged by the initial challenger to the proposed amendment.
For those of you new to this service, anything in BOLD RED in the municipal amendment summary is new information since the last update and BLUE BOLD is information which first appeared in the last update. THE INFORMATION WHICH APPEARS IN THIS UPDATE IS MORE CURRENT AND MORE ACCURATE THAN WHAT APPEARS ON THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY'S WEBSITE, BECAUSE THE INFORMATION IS BEING PROVIDED IN MANY CASES BY FIRST-HAND SOURCES.
Kenneth Shefler Inspection Services (Dallas, PA) - Full service minus accessibility and fire. Residential and commercial. Most of Central/NorthCentral/Northeast PA)
Remington, Vernick & Beach (Conshohocken) - Full service minus accessibility and electrical. Residential and Commercial. Will not work in opt-out municipalities. Southeastern PA & Cumberland.
HB1507 is the only UCC-related bill that is currently poised for possible consideration and action by the full House of Representatives.
The bill was re-referred to the Labor Relations Committee, which made some significant amendments to the bill, and then reported the bill to the full house. The bill was given first consideration on May 11th and then "laid on the table", as required by the rules of the legislative process.
(If you are not personally familiar with the process that a bill follows during consideration and leading to ultimate passage, follow this link (it's really fairly interesting and something that everyone should know who is planning to become legislatively active): (make sure to click on "continue" to the next part at the bottom of each page)
HB1507 basically deals with "illegally occupied structures" that were illegal on April 10, 2004 by virtue of existing before the UCC took effect and by virtue of never having been issued a certificate of occupancy or occupancy permit.
HB1507 would create a "mechanism or method" by which these illegally occupied structures could be declared "legally occupied" and issued a certificate of occupancy under the UCC:
1. These buildings shall be treated as existing buildings under Chapter 3
2. The BCO shall issue a certificate of occupancy for these buildings if:
The entire building meets the requirements of Chapter 3 for fire protection systems and means of egress (please note that the bill itself defines fire protection systems & means of egress)
The building is not unsafe, unsanitary or judged to be a fire hazard or dangerous to human life or public welfare
For buildings under this section only, the BCO shall not require changes to the building which are technically infeasible for the purpose of meeting means of egress requirements
A BCO shall construe this section liberally to allow a property owner to maintain occupancy of a building under this section.
The amendments adopted by the Labor Relations Committee basically deal with immunity from liability for decisions made and actions taken under the provisions of this bill (assuming it becomes law).
Municipalities would not be held civilly liable for its acts or omissions in permitting the occupancy of a building which did not have a certificate of occupancy prior to April 10, 2004
The Commonwealth shall indemnify and hold harmless all of the following against claims for acts or omissions described in point #1
a. Municipalities
b. Elected or appointed municipal officials
c. Municipal employee or agent (third party agencies would be considered municipal agents)
d. Municipal volunteers
NOW..... for all of you that have been tormented by the illegally occupied structure issue, this piece of legislation would clearly address the issue. Please open the pdf, read the AMENDED bill, and decide if the provisions of this bill would solve the issue (or improve it) from your vantage point.
I would appreciate hearing from as many of you as possible regarding your stance on this bill....do you support it (and why)... do you oppose it (and why)....would you like to see additional or different language in the bill (and what would you want that language to accomplish). PABCO is prepared to become involved in the legislative debate on this bill, but would certainly like to know where its members stand on the bill, as it currently exists.
Non-PABCO members are invited to share their thoughts and comments and will be taken into consideration by the PABCO members who ultimately will decide whatever actions PABCO takes.
Nonetheless, if you support this bill, contact YOUR state representative (the one and only one that you can vote for). If you oppose this bill, contact them as well. Tell them WHY you support or oppose the bill. What problems would the bill solve or lessen. What additional problems would the bill create.
Contact your representative by phone, fax, email, letter or in-person. The most effective method is certainly in person or by phone, because you can have a dialogue about this bill and the problems it intends to help, as opposed to you simply stating your position via email, fax or letter. However, expressing yourself, regardless of the method you choose, is the most important point of all.
If you decide to get your employees or others involved in supporting or opposing this legislation, and if they do not know who their state representative is, just CLICK HERE for information on how to find your state rep or senator.
The next step will be second consideration by the full house. That could occur at any time now. So....please educate yourself about the bill and prepare a few brief notes of how the bill would help or hurt you and the constituents that you and your representative serve.
If you have questions about the bill (what it really means) that have not been answered in this report, or are looking for help with talking points in your individual situation, feel free to call or email me.
I would appreciate hearing any reactions or responses you receive from your representatives.
