4.13 Codes & Standards Committee - July Report
There were a few significant events for the committee during July 2025. The first of these was a series of meetings of the ICC Building Codes Advisory Committee (BCAC), on which the C&S Committee chair is an active participant as a "Friend of the Committee." (Although not a voting member, the BCAC rules allows friends to fully participate in meetings.) The series of meetings held in July was to review all the BCAC code modifications that went through the Group B CAH#1 ICC code meetings held during April and May in Orlando, which were attended by the chair and AIBD's senior staff member. Many of the BCAC's proposed modifications were denied or accepted subject to changes. The BCAC meetings, which were to draft public comments proposing changes to the original modification submittals, were a great opportunity to see the inner workings of such processes and to continue to involve AIBD in key ICC activities.
The chair also submitted a public comment directly to the CAH#2 consideration program for a second chance to get our main proposed code modification across the finish line and into the International Residential Code (IRC) At the next round of meetings to be held during October 2025 in Cleveland, Ohio. This modification had already been accepted in CAH#1 for the International Building Code (IBC) and International Existing Building Code (IEBC). The modification changes IBC section 107 to clarify the requirements for signed and sealed construction documents, in large part by adding two new definitions for "special condition" and "supplemental construction documents." It also provides support for digital documents. All of the proposals being consider in 2025 will inform the 2027 edition of the model codes.
As you may recall, the impetus for these specific code modifications was our need to address adverse policies adopted by a number of local building officials. The most notable of the affected local jurisdictions is Broward County, Florida, its Board of Rules & Appeals (BORA). At their July 10, 2025 board meeting, BORA considered and rejected code modifications proposed by the C&S Committee chair that were similar to those approved by the ICC during CAH#1. Although these modifications were rejected, the action was a win in two ways. First, it was an official action by the board, which will reinforce our challenge to the local amendments being heard next month by the Florida Building Commission. BORA had rejected our challenge to the way local amendments had been adopted, as authorized under section 553.73(4)(f), Florida Statutes, through a staff action rather than a formal decision by its board. This denial was appealed to the Florida Building Commission, which was to have promptly sent it to the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) for a hearing officer to be assigned. Instead, the staff set it for a review by the Commission to decide whether the appeal should be heard. (Reportedly, no challenge had ever made it this far in the process.) Having the BORA board actually reject the same material submitted as support for the code modification should eliminate any doubt as to BORA's official position and allow the appeal to go through. In fact, BORA's opposition to our appeal, filed on July 25, is a statement of official policy that also supports our position that the staff denial was an official act subject to appeal.
The second way BORA's action in July was a win, of sorts, was the staff's submission of its own proposed local code modification that would remove the long-standing restrictions on unlicensed persons submitting construction documents for permitting based on a cost of construction threshold, which was $15,000 for commercial and $30,000 for residential projects. (State thresholds are $25,000 for commercial and unlimited for residential.) Although the modification proposes to remove these additions to the statewide code, they were accompanied by a staff memo that said most plan content would be viewed as engineering in nature, and thereby require signed and sealed drawings from a state-licensed engineer. Such content includes, even for residential work, all load-bearing walls (including all exterior walls), windows, and exterior doors. The only exempt items would be things not included in the building code (cabinets, trim, etc.) and interior non-load-bearing walls. So, although they now accept our opinion that BORA cannot alter state regulation of building designers, they have developed an alternative means of eliminating the statutory exemptions for residential work. It remains to be seen whether this alternative regulatory scheme will withstand our current challenge, which impacts all local amendments to the statewide code. The second reading and public hearing on the staff's proposal will occur at the August 14 board meeting. Our hearing before the Florida Building Commission will be on August 12.
The last activity for the month to report was when the C&S Committee chair worked with AIBD staff to develop text for a future committee membership recruitment effort. The draft text describes the code development cycle and the committee's efforts to support our members through a free advisory service and our involvement in state, local, and ICC code enforcement and modification activities. Our objective is to develop a committee membership network that can provide input on code activities across the country and support outreach activities when needed.
The chair also submitted a public comment directly to the CAH#2 consideration program for a second chance to get our main proposed code modification across the finish line and into the International Residential Code (IRC) At the next round of meetings to be held during October 2025 in Cleveland, Ohio. This modification had already been accepted in CAH#1 for the International Building Code (IBC) and International Existing Building Code (IEBC). The modification changes IBC section 107 to clarify the requirements for signed and sealed construction documents, in large part by adding two new definitions for "special condition" and "supplemental construction documents." It also provides support for digital documents. All of the proposals being consider in 2025 will inform the 2027 edition of the model codes.
As you may recall, the impetus for these specific code modifications was our need to address adverse policies adopted by a number of local building officials. The most notable of the affected local jurisdictions is Broward County, Florida, its Board of Rules & Appeals (BORA). At their July 10, 2025 board meeting, BORA considered and rejected code modifications proposed by the C&S Committee chair that were similar to those approved by the ICC during CAH#1. Although these modifications were rejected, the action was a win in two ways. First, it was an official action by the board, which will reinforce our challenge to the local amendments being heard next month by the Florida Building Commission. BORA had rejected our challenge to the way local amendments had been adopted, as authorized under section 553.73(4)(f), Florida Statutes, through a staff action rather than a formal decision by its board. This denial was appealed to the Florida Building Commission, which was to have promptly sent it to the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) for a hearing officer to be assigned. Instead, the staff set it for a review by the Commission to decide whether the appeal should be heard. (Reportedly, no challenge had ever made it this far in the process.) Having the BORA board actually reject the same material submitted as support for the code modification should eliminate any doubt as to BORA's official position and allow the appeal to go through. In fact, BORA's opposition to our appeal, filed on July 25, is a statement of official policy that also supports our position that the staff denial was an official act subject to appeal.
The second way BORA's action in July was a win, of sorts, was the staff's submission of its own proposed local code modification that would remove the long-standing restrictions on unlicensed persons submitting construction documents for permitting based on a cost of construction threshold, which was $15,000 for commercial and $30,000 for residential projects. (State thresholds are $25,000 for commercial and unlimited for residential.) Although the modification proposes to remove these additions to the statewide code, they were accompanied by a staff memo that said most plan content would be viewed as engineering in nature, and thereby require signed and sealed drawings from a state-licensed engineer. Such content includes, even for residential work, all load-bearing walls (including all exterior walls), windows, and exterior doors. The only exempt items would be things not included in the building code (cabinets, trim, etc.) and interior non-load-bearing walls. So, although they now accept our opinion that BORA cannot alter state regulation of building designers, they have developed an alternative means of eliminating the statutory exemptions for residential work. It remains to be seen whether this alternative regulatory scheme will withstand our current challenge, which impacts all local amendments to the statewide code. The second reading and public hearing on the staff's proposal will occur at the August 14 board meeting. Our hearing before the Florida Building Commission will be on August 12.
The last activity for the month to report was when the C&S Committee chair worked with AIBD staff to develop text for a future committee membership recruitment effort. The draft text describes the code development cycle and the committee's efforts to support our members through a free advisory service and our involvement in state, local, and ICC code enforcement and modification activities. Our objective is to develop a committee membership network that can provide input on code activities across the country and support outreach activities when needed.