By Dan McCue

South Carolina’s building officials plan to draft a letter to their state representatives next month asking that building contractors be required to maintain their professional certifications through continuing education and an as-yet unformulated regime of follow-up testing.

“The thing of it is, under state law we building officials and inspectors are required to maintain our education. But a contractor, once he takes his licensing exam and passes, isn’t required to do any follow-up at all,” said Darbis L. Briggman, building director for the City of North Charleston and president of the Building Officials Association of South Carolina.

“What we’re hoping is that during the next session of the Legislature we’ll get legislation passed that will require that kind of continuing education.”

While the tragic deaths of nine firefighters in the June 18 Sofa Super Store blaze heightened the business community’s awareness of the fire codes in place in the Lowcountry, building officials believe there’s still a general lack of awareness of the building and electrical codes that apply to residential and commercial development.

“Of course, we, the building officials, are the ones that have a responsibility to enforce the code, and it would be unrealistic to expect all contractors to know every nuance, but it would be to the benefit of everyone, from a time, cost and safety perspective, if business people knew a whole lot more about the codes than they do now,” Briggman said.

“Leaving aside the fact that knowledgeable building code compliance will get your residential or commercial project done faster and more efficiently, you also have to remember that we as a region are prone to specific threats to our building stock, including the high winds of tropical storms and hurricanes as well as seismic activity. It’s no exaggeration to say that we are on a critical path.”

In the state of South Carolina, all building officials must complete at least 12 hours of training each year and may have to take additional courses depending upon the specialized certifications they want to keep current.

While building departments across the state provide courses in significant changes in the codes, participation by contractors is strictly voluntary under state law, Briggman said.

What’s in place
The most recent change in the code, one that went into effect July 1, was the state’s adoption of the 2005 edition of the National Electrical Code promulgated by the National Electrical Contractors Association.

For other aspects of construction, South Carolina is currently using the 2003 version of the International Building Code but will move to the 2006 version in July 2008.

Why the disparity in years?
It relates to the necessary public notice and public comment periods that go along with implementing new rules. As a result, municipalities are always a few years behind the organizations, such as the International Code Council, that call for the changes, Briggman said.

Under South Carolina law, local municipalities must adopt the International Building Code as is. However, the local building official is the sole authority on the enforcement and interpretation of building codes in his area of jurisdiction.

While local municipalities can pass building-related ordinances on their own volition, if a building official wants to actually change a requirement in the code, he or she has to go before the state’s building code council in Columbia to explain the rationale behind the change and get the council’s approval.

Sometimes officials also weigh in to ensure that protections in the state code stay in place, said Edye R. Graves, deputy building official for the city of Charleston.

“A prime example of that was what happened after the state initially adopted the International Building Code in 2000,” she said. “Building officials in the Upstate didn’t want to have to enforce stringent guidelines for earthquake protection and were seeking to have those rules deleted from the code.

“Obviously we here in the Lowcountry, which is a seismically active region, fought that. In fact, we, along with officials from North Charleston and Charleston County, spoke out against the proposed change and kept it from being approved.”