Locally owned & operated public airport & TSA - permit exemption?

[MikeC]

First, I am in a very rural area of Pennsylvania. The local, small airport, is owned and operated by the local airport authority. TSA is upgrading their portion of the building and their equipment, which includes upgrades to the electrical system in that portion of the building. The GC is claiming that, because TSA leases the space, it is treated as a federal building and exempt from local codes and permitting. While I haven't dug into this yet, I have always thought that leased spaces aren't exempt from local permits and codes. I get this opinion from CFR Title 41 section 102-80.85. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-41/subtitle-C/chapter-102/subchapter-C/part-102-80

Does anybody have any experience with this type of project?

 

[ICE]

There Is this regarding fire code. I didn’t find anything on the rest of the codes.

§ 102-80.85 Are Federally owned and leased buildings exempt from State and local code requirements in fire protection?​

Federally owned buildings are generally exempt from State and local code requirements in fire protection; however, in accordance with 40 U.S.C. 3312, each building constructed or altered by a Federal agency must be constructed or altered, to the maximum extent feasible, in compliance with one of the nationally recognized model building codes and with other nationally recognized codes. Leased buildings are subject to local code requirements and inspection.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

The link you posted is quite specific on this question. IMHO there is no question:

 

[mtlogcabin]

§ 102-80.85 Are Federally owned and leased buildings exempt from State and local code requirements in fire protection?​

Federally owned buildings are generally exempt from State and local code requirements in fire protection; however, in accordance with 40 U.S.C. 3312, each building constructed or altered by a Federal agency must be constructed or altered, to the maximum extent feasible, in compliance with one of the nationally recognized model building codes and with other nationally recognized codes. Leased buildings are subject to local code requirements and inspection.

The

 

[mtlogcabin]

Our federal post office refused to let the fire department into the non-public portion of the facility to create a response plan for the facility. The fire chief informed them that in the event of a fire they would need to call the nearest federal fire department to respond. That would be Malmstrom AFB in Great Falls Montana about 200 miles to the east. They let us in after that.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

If not needing a permit, what happens when the lease runs out? Tear down the building? Go by who owns the building, not the tenant.

 

[ICE]

They let us in after that.

I encountered a TI at a warehouse that lacked any permits. I was denied entry because the facility was intended for the manufacture of top secret hardware. I wondered out loud if they could do that without electricity. Permits were obtained and I was allowed to enter.

 

[MikeC]

Our federal post office refused to let the fire department into the non-public portion of the facility to create a response plan for the facility. The fire chief informed them that in the event of a fire they would need to call the nearest federal fire department to respond. That would be Malmstrom AFB in Great Falls Montana about 200 miles to the east. They let us in after that.

I agree 100% that federally owned buildings are exempt from local codes. I won't even question that. The issue that I am currently dealing with is that this is not a federally owned building. TSA occupies a portion of the lobby, and they want to alter a portion of the building's electric system without oversight.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Show them the paragraph that several of us have highlighted. It's rather clear.

 

[MikeC]

I responded with the following, somewhat redacted email. For the cost of permitting, I doubt they want to get lawyers involved, but we'll see. In all seriousness, I don't have time for this crap.

I have had some time to review this and come to the following conclusions.

• The building is owned by the *redacted owner's name* Airport Authority.
• The proposed work is within the building and alters a regulated system within the building.
• The *redacted owner's name* Airport Authority is not entitled to any exemptions from the Pennsylvania Uniform Construction Code (UCC).
• The UCC requires the building owner to obtain a permit prior to any regulated work being performed.
• The UCC requires the permit to be on site at any time regulated work is being performed.
• The building owner is obligated by law to comply with the requirements of the UCC.
• The proposed work in this structure is regulated by the UCC regardless of who performs the work or who contracts the work to be performed.

While I understand that federally owned buildings are exempt from local and state building code regulations, this building is not federally owned. The proposed alterations are being made to a building that is owned by the *redacted owner's name* Airport Authority, regardless of who may currently be in control of the space within the building. 41 CFR 102-80.85 states that, while federally owned buildings shall be exempted from the enforcement of state and local codes, leased buildings are required to comply with these codes. While TSA does have the authority to acquire and construct, TSA does not have the authority to alter a system that is not within its acquisition. In the event that TSA has acquired complete control over this space, it shall not rely on any systems outside of that space without the regulation of the authority having jurisdiction over those systems.
I have overseen the construction and alterations of spaces leased by DoD in the past. Local enforcement, including ADA violations created by DoD specified fixtures, has never created any major problems.

 

[jar546]

Leased is not owned and I've run across this in PA before. There is no doubt that the local municipality has jurisdiction.

However, I did run across a different scenario at the WB/Scranton Airport whereas:

The federal government built a new tower on leased land. So, although the land was the airport authority, the building was federally owned and therefore exempt.