Could Connecticut's Codes and Standards Committee hear an appeal of a state building inspector's decision about where a wheelchair lift may be installed?

Plain-English summary

Connecticut's Department of Public Safety asked whether the Codes and Standards Committee could hear an appeal from a state building inspector's decision under section 29-200. That provision governed where inclined stairway chairlifts and vertical wheelchair or incline lifts could be installed. For buildings outside two listed categories, it required joint approval by the state building inspector and the director of the office protecting persons with disabilities. The Attorney General said the committee could not review that decision about the type of building eligible for a lift.

The opinion drew a line between approving a building for a lift and reviewing the lift's installation. The committee's statutes gave it duties under the building and fire code chapter and authority to review certain accessibility-code variations, but no review power over a section 29-200 decision in a different chapter. Once a lift was approved for a building, its installation still had to comply with the Connecticut Basic Building Code and Fire Safety Code. The committee had jurisdiction over that installation compliance.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1990. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Historical summary

For building inspectors and accessibility officials: The opinion assigned the section 29-200 building-eligibility decision to the state building inspector and disability-protection director jointly. It found no committee appeal route for that decision.

For property owners and code administrators: The opinion did not exempt an approved lift from building or fire codes. It said the committee retained jurisdiction over the actual installation under those codes.

Common questions

Could the Codes and Standards Committee overturn a decision about which building may have a wheelchair lift?

The Attorney General said no for decisions made under section 29-200. The committee's statutory review powers did not extend to those building-eligibility decisions.

Did an approved wheelchair lift still have to comply with building and fire codes?

Yes. The opinion said installation after approval had to comply with the applicable Connecticut Basic Building Code and Fire Safety Code provisions.

What part of a lift project could the committee review?

The committee had jurisdiction over the actual installation's code compliance, but not over the prior decision about the kind of building or structure in which the device could be placed.

Background and statutory framework

As amended in 1989, section 29-200 allowed the listed lift devices in buildings used principally for certain civic, religious, fraternal, or charitable gatherings and in one- or two-family residential buildings. In other buildings, it required joint approval from the building inspector and the disability-protection director. The opinion treated that statute as governing the building category where installation was permitted.

The committee's enforcement duties under section 29-251 concerned the building and fire code chapter. The opinion read section 29-269 as allowing review of decisions about variations or exemptions from handicap-accessibility code provisions. The opinion said neither grant reached decisions under section 29-200. It cited State v. Whiteman for the principle that statutory construction cannot add an omitted provision. A separate regulation required approved installations to meet applicable building and fire codes, explaining why committee jurisdiction remained for that later question.

Citations and references

The opinion discusses General Statutes sections 29-200, 29-251, and 29-269, 1989 Public Acts No. 89-144, and a regulation on lift installation. It cites State v. Whiteman, 204 Conn. 98, 103, 526 A.2d 869 (1987), and State ex rel. Gold v. Usher, 138 Conn. 323, 325, 84 A.2d 276 (1951). The official HTML renders some section symbols as “e”; the original-text section preserves that rendering.

Source

• Landing page: https://portal.ct.gov/AG/Opinions
• Opinion page: https://portal.ct.gov/ag/opinions/1990-formal-opinions/honorable-bernard-r-sullivan-commissioner-department-of-public-safety--1990026-formal-opinion-attorn

Original opinion text

Honorable Bernard R. Sullivan, Commissioner, Department of Public Safety , 1990-026 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

Attorney General's Opinion

Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal

July 24, 1990

Honorable Bernard R. Sullivan

Commissioner

Department of Public Safety

100 Washington Street

Hartford, Connecticut 06106

Dear Commissioner Sullivan:

In a letter to our office from your predecessor, our advice is requested on the authority of the codes and standards committee to review the actions of the state building inspector taken pursuant to General Statutes e 29-200. Our advice is sought on the following question:

Does the Codes and Standards Committee have jurisdiction to hear an appeal of the decision of the State Building Inspector when that official is acting pursuant to Chapter 538, Section 29-200 of the Connecticut General Statutes?

Our analysis of the relationship between Conn. Gen. Stat.

e 29-200 and the duties of the Codes and Standards Committee under Conn. Gen. Stat.

e 29-251 indicates that the answer to your question is no.

Conn. Gen. Stat.

e 29-200 as amended by 1989 Public Acts No. 89-144 provides as follows:

The commissioner of public safety shall adopt regulations in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54 concerning the installation, operation, maintenance and use of inclined stairway chairlifts and vertical wheelchair or incline lifts. Such lifts may be installed (1) in buildings principally used for meeting, gathering or assembling by civic, religious, fraternal or charitable organization, (2) in residential buildings designed to be occupied by one or two families, and (3) in other buildings and structures only if the executive director of the office of protection and advocacy for persons with disabilities and the state building inspector jointly approve such installation. In adopting such regulations, the commissioner may adopt by reference standards concerning inclined stairway chairlifts and vertical wheelchair or incline lifts set forth by the American National Standards Institute.

A review of Conn. Gen. Stat.

e 29-200 clearly indicates that it was enacted to permit the installation, operation, maintenance and use of inclined stairway chairlifts and vertical wheelchair or incline lifts in certain specified buildings. Moreover, Section 29-200 permits the installation of such devices in other buildings or structures only upon the joint approval of the state building inspector and the director of the office of protection and advocacy for persons with disabilities. Thus, it appears that Section 29-200 is primarily concerned with the type of building or structure in which such devices may be installed. The authority to make that determination rests with the state building inspector and director of the office of protection and advocacy for persons with disabilities.

The codes and standards committee is responsible, along with the state building inspector, for the enforcement of part Ia of Chapter 541 and, along with the state fire marshal, for the enforcement of part II of Chapter 541 of the General Statutes. Conn. Gen. Stat.

e 29-251. The codes and standards committee's statutory authority does not extend to the provisions of Chapter 538 of the General Statutes in which Conn. Gen. Stat.

e 29-200 is found.

Conn. Gen. Stat.

e 29-269 authorizes the codes and standards committee to review decisions of the state building inspector and director of the office of protection and advocacy for persons with disabilities, as they relate to variations or exemptions from the handicap accessibility provisions of the state building code contained in that section. Conn. Gen. Stat.

e 29-200 does not contain any provision for review of a decision made thereunder.

All three statutes, Sections 29-200, 29-251 and 29-269, were amended as recently as l989. The legislature, however, saw fit not to extend the authority of the codes and standards committee under Sections 29-251 and 29-269 to review a decision made by the state building inspector and the director of the office of protection and advocacy for persons with disabilities under Section 29-200.

It must be presumed that the legislature did not intend to have the appeal provision of Conn. Gen. Stat.

e 29-269 apply to a decision made pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat.

e 29-200, or it would have so stated. A provision not encompassed within a statute cannot be added through statutory construction. State v. Whiteman, 204 Conn. 98, 103, 526 A.2d 869 (1987). Thus, the codes and standards committee cannot review a matter over which it has no authority. Cf. State ex rel. Gold v. Usher, 138 Conn. 323, 325, 84 A.2d 276 (1951).

We do note, however, that once the approval is granted to permit the installation of such a device in a particular building or structure, said installation must be in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Connecticut Basic Building Code and Fire Safety Code. Regs. Conn. State Agencies

e 29-200-7. Thus, while the codes and standards committee may not decide in which building or structure inclined stairway chairlifts and vertical wheelchair or incline lifts may be installed, it does have jurisdiction over the actual installation by virtue of the Connecticut Basic Building Code and Fire Safety Code.

Very truly yours,

CLARINE NARDI RIDDLE

ATTORNEY GENERAL

Henri Alexandre

Assistant Attorney General

CNR/HA/ec