Could Fripp Island require sprinklers in new homes through water-district rules in 1995?

Official title

Concerning as to whether the Fripp Island Public Service District would have the authority to adopt, as part of its water regulations, a requirement that all newly constructed residences within the Fripp island Public Service District be required to have sprinkler systems.

Requester

Michael L. M. Jordan, Esquire

Plain-English summary

A 1995 South Carolina Attorney General letter addressed a proposal by the Fripp Island Public Service District to require sprinklers in newly built homes through its water regulations. The author regarded the requirement as a building-code matter. She said Beaufort County may already have adopted standard codes that would need modification or waiver to impose the proposed sprinkler requirement.

The letter pointed to a statutory process for modifying or varying a county code when local physical or climate conditions made the standard code inadequate. Fripp Island's geographic isolation was an example of a condition the district could present to the Building Code Council. The author also enclosed an earlier opinion on special-purpose districts and code adoption, but this short letter did not definitively authorize the district to impose the requirement by itself.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995. 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.

Common questions

Q: Did the AG directly approve a water-district rule requiring home sprinklers? A: No. The letter classified the proposal as a building-code issue and discussed possible modification or waiver of codes adopted by Beaufort County.

Q: Why did Fripp Island's location matter?
A: The letter identified geographic isolation as a possible local physical condition for the Building Code Council to consider under the then-current variance or modification process.

Q: Did the letter establish that Beaufort County had already changed its building code? A: No. It said the county may have adopted one or more standard codes and pointed to the process for any needed change.

Background and statutory framework

The district asked about mandatory sprinklers in new residences and raised its enabling law and building-code statute. The letter focused on where the proposed rule belonged within the code system and suggested consultation with the Building Code Council and county government.

Citations and references

• S.C. Code Ann. §6-9-60
• South Carolina AG opinion dated March 28, 1990

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/september-22-1995-1/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/1995sept22jordan.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLES MOLONY CONDON
AITORNEY GENERAL

September 22, 1995

I
I

Michael L. M. Jordan, Esquire
Post Office Box 5668
Hilton Head Island, South Carolina 29938
RE: Informal Opinion
Dear Mr. Jordan:
Thank you for your letter of August 3, 1995, to Attorney General Condon, in which you sought an opinion as to whether the Fripp Island Public Service District would have the authority to adopt, as a part of its water regulations, a requirement that all newly constructed residences within the Fripp Island Public Service District be required to have sprinkler systems. In your thorough memorandum you referenced the enabling legislation of the District, various potential constitutional issues, and also the possibility that S.C. Code Ann. §6-9-60 (1994 Cum. Supp.) might pose some difficulty to the District. Upon my researching the matter and talking with personnel at the South Carolina Building Code Council, I am of the view that the type of regulation envisioned by the District would be a matter within the purview of a building code. I understand from the Building Code Council that Beaufort County may already have adopted one or more of the standard codes authorized under §6-9-60, which code or codes would require modification or waiver to require that sprinkler systems be installed in newly constructed residences. There is a provision in §6-9-60 for a county to have the appropriate code or codes modified or varied upon a showing that the code or codes do not meet the needs of the county due to local physical or climatological conditions; the reasons which you cited in your letter, and particularly the fact that Fripp Island is isolated geographically (a local physical condition), could be pointed out to the Building Code Council for its consideration.

RnJBFRT

c Dr:'''s Bl IJ.Of',G

•

Posr OFFICE Box 11549

•

COLL \IBIA.

s.c 29211-1549

•

TELEPHO,E:

803-73-1.-3970

•

F.KSl~f!LE: 803-253-6283

Michael L. M. Jordan, Esquire
Page 2
September 22, 1995
I am enclosing herewith a copy of an opinion of this Office dated March 28, 1990, as to the authority of a special purpose district to adopt one or more of the standard codes detailed in §6-9-60. That opinion also suggested ways to work with county council to accomplish the same objective sought by the special purpose district. You may wish to consult with the personnel at the Building Code Council to discuss this matter further and to obtain the forms necessary for waiver or modification of the relevant code or codes which have been adopted by Beaufort County Council. The general information telephone number for the Building Code Council is (803) 734-4255. This letter is an informal opinion only. It has been written by a designated Senior Assistant Attorney General and represents the position of the undersigned attorney as to the specific questions asked. It has not, however, been personally scrutinized by the Attorney General nor officially published in the manner of a formal opinion. With kindest regards, I am Sincerely,

~0f~
Patricia D. Petway
Senior Assistant Attorney General
Enclosure