The ASME A17.1 Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators is a national consensus standard, but it has no force of law until a state or local jurisdiction formally adopts it. That adoption process varies wildly across the country. States like California, Massachusetts, and New York typically adopt new code editions within one to two years of ASME publication. Other states, particularly those with smaller elevator populations or less active regulatory infrastructure, can lag five to ten years behind the current edition. A handful of states have no statewide elevator code at all, leaving regulation entirely to local municipalities or, in some cases, no one.
The Authority Having Jurisdiction, commonly referred to as the AHJ, is the entity responsible for enforcing the adopted code edition within a given area. AHJs can be state elevator boards, city building departments, or third-party inspection agencies operating under state contract. When a mechanic pulls a permit and calls for inspection, the inspector is checking compliance against whichever code edition that specific AHJ has adopted. This means a contractor working in New Jersey might be building to the 2019 edition of A17.1, while a job 20 miles away in New York City could require compliance with the 2022 edition. The equipment is the same, the installation methods are similar, but the code requirements and acceptance criteria differ.
For national elevator contractors and OEMs, this creates real operational headaches. Companies like Otis, KONE, Schindler, and TK Elevator sell products across all 50 states and must certify equipment to multiple code editions simultaneously. A controller or safety device that meets the 2022 edition may include features that are not required (or not yet recognized) under older editions still enforced in some states. Training programs have to address multiple code versions. Bid documents require careful review to identify which edition applies to each project. Field supervisors need to verify that their crews are building to the correct code, not just the code they are most familiar with.
The situation is particularly difficult for traveling mechanics. IUEC members who travel for work, whether booming out to another local or working for a national contractor across state lines, must adapt to unfamiliar code requirements on short notice. A mechanic who has spent years working under one state's adopted edition may arrive at a new job site and find different requirements for car top clearances, pit depths, door restrictor devices, or firefighters' emergency operation. NAESA publishes state-by-state adoption data that serves as a reference, but keeping current requires active effort and, ideally, support from the contractor's engineering or compliance department.
Industry groups have long pushed for faster and more uniform adoption. NAESA, the National Elevator Industry Inc. (NEII), and the IUEC have all advocated for states to adopt current code editions promptly, arguing that outdated codes leave gaps in safety protection for the riding public. The counterargument from some state regulators is that adoption requires legislative or rulemaking action, budget allocation for inspector training, and time for the local industry to prepare. Until the adoption process itself becomes more standardized, the patchwork will persist, and everyone in the vertical transportation industry will need to plan accordingly.