Phase One and Phase Two Inspections “Who’s on First?”

There’s been confusion in the industry regarding Phase Two inspections under the new statewide recertification program. As a licensed Professional Engineer who was directly involved in the Surfside Working Group following the Champlain Towers collapse, I want to help clarify the intent behind these inspection phases and where things have gone off course.

The original goal of the working group was to adopt a uniform statewide recertification protocol modeled after the long-established 40-Year Building Safety Inspection Programs in Broward and Miami-Dade Counties. We were not trying to reinvent the wheel—just expand a proven system statewide.

Under that model, a Phase One inspection was intended to be a baseline visual structural condition assessment—essentially the traditional 40-year inspection. If deficiencies were found that warranted further investigation or repair, then a second, more thorough inspection would be required to identify the scope and necessary remediation.

However, during the legislative process, particularly in the House, new language was introduced—specifically referencing “substantial structural deterioration.” That language significantly altered how Phase Two inspections are interpreted and applied today. Now, some buildings can pass a Phase One even when repairs are needed. This undermines the original purpose of the process and creates both confusion and risk.

Some building departments and municipalities have started implementing their own corrective interpretations. But the core issue remains: if a building needs repairs identified during a Phase One inspection, it should undergo a follow-up inspection and a repair project—whether or not it’s officially labeled a “Phase Two.”

If your association or building is facing uncertainty over these requirements, we’re here to help. Our office would be happy to provide guidance and explain how to navigate this evolving regulatory landscape.