Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elevator Standards topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SB 5156 elevator provisions prompt SBCC to request coordination with L&I and clarifications
Summary
The SBCC legislative committee on March 25 reviewed Senate Bill 5156 and agreed to ask sponsors to clarify whether the bill targets single‑exit buildings or applies broadly, to explicitly reference the Department of Labor & Industries for elevator standards, and to allow additional time for coordination and implementation.
The State Building Code Council legislative committee discussed Senate Bill 5156 on March 25, 2025, and agreed to prepare a letter and testimony asking sponsors to clarify intent, limit cross‑agency precedent risks, and allow more time for coordination with the state Department of Labor & Industries (L&I).
Committee members said the bill as filed includes changes to the commercial elevator chapter (chapter 30), adds exceptions for small elevator cars and ambulance‑stretcher requirements, and contains a temperature‑control amendment for machinery/equipment rooms. Members also raised concerns that the bill’s text does not clearly point code users to L&I for elevator permitting and inspection, despite L&I historically administering elevator programs.
Why it matters
Committee members noted three immediate issues for testimony and a draft letter: (1) clarify whether the bill is meant to target single‑exit/walk‑up residential buildings or to apply broadly across commercial codes; (2) confirm whether L&I will retain responsibility for elevator standards adoption and enforcement and add an explicit pointer to L&I in the code text for code users; and (3) provide more time or align the work with the SBCC’s normal code adoption cycle (or otherwise fund and resource L&I) because L&I’s fiscal note estimated significant implementation costs and rapid timelines would create practical difficulties.
Discussion and next steps
Members discussed numeric triggers in the bill (24 units cited in the filed version) and flagged potential conflicts with existing single‑exit work and unit counts the SBCC is already considering. The committee asked staff to draft a letter to sponsors summarizing these points, ask whether the 24‑unit threshold (and related story/unit limits) is intended, and to recommend targeting any single‑exit changes specifically to the SBCC’s single‑exit appendix rather than sweeping the main code.
The committee also suggested small editorial changes (for example, the use of the word "that" versus "which" in a clause that could change legal scope) and asked staff to request clarification on which "department" the bill references (the transcript indicates the bill references chapter 70.87 and the department defined there, which corresponds to L&I).
Ending
Staff will draft a letter and testimony and circulate it to the committee for review. No formal vote was recorded; the committee opted to send comments and seek sponsor clarification and coordination with L&I before any statutory changes proceed.
