Re: Notice of violation & Order to correct - JCFD

Posted by Bamb00zle on 2018/5/24 9:09:07
Here’s the section of the NJR I cited yesterday. Older NJR (New Jersey Register) records can be difficult to search, so I thought it could be helpful to post. The citation is 24 N.J.R. 739, Monday, March 2, 1992. Old NJR’s are cited by page, so you need to read the entire page to find the section of interest. They are on the web – in .pdf format – with text that can’t be searched by computer. Challenging to find what you need.

The response below is from the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) to a comment from the New Jersey Builders Association (NJBA) about the impact of Code updates. I’ve added the bold to highlight the clear guidance from DCA in response to the NJBA comment. The “retrofit” referred to are the requirements of the UFC, as the comment / response was in the context of proposed amendments to the UFC mandates. However, the guidance holds generally. If the work met current code requirements in effect at the time of construction or updating (rehab / installation) then you’re done – often shorthanded as “pre-existing condition.” If you do look it up, don’t be confused by the NJAC 5:18 reference. That section is the original UFC reference, subsequently renumbered to the current NJAC 5:70 reference in use today.

“RESPONSE: References to the Uniform Construction Code are made only for the purpose of establishing installation standards for required equipment and systems. These references avoid problems for construction officials, allow for advances in technology, and result in reduced confusion. Moreover, once a building has met the requirements of the retrofit and has received either a certificate of occupancy or a certificate of approval for the required systems, no further upgrading would be required because of a change in the Uniform Construction Code.”

This Post was from: