PHILADELPHIA — State officials and environmentalists are in a court battle over how Pennsylvania handles hundreds of updates to buildings codes.

The suit was filed in June by the Philadelphia-based Clean Air Council.

The group’s lawsuit asks the Commonwealth Court to strike down a 2011 state law that lays out rules for how Pennsylvania’s Review and Advisory Council can review and adopt building code changes into the state’s Uniform Construction Code. These changes are mandated every three years. Among other things, the law requires the council to review and approve individually hundreds of code changes.

The issue has prompted local discussion among safety officials and contractors. In an open letter published in July, Butler Township fire marshal Larry Christy called for the state to revise the code revision process, calling it “dysfunctional” and saying it was adversely impacted by special interest groups.

The suit says that process is time-consuming and confusing for council members, who struggled in each of the state’s two previous code review cycles to find a consensus. In 2012 the council rejected all of the more than 900 code changes proposed by the International Construction Code, the suit says. In 2015 council members voted to adopt 16 of the 1,900 code changes published in the ICC, the suit said.

The lagging code updates mean the state is missing cost savings from new energy efficiency standards, and failing to keep up with health and safety updates such as a large reduction in the maximum amount of lead allowed in piping, the suit says.

“The process is flawed, the law as it stands is unworkable, and because new codes are not adopted in Pennsylvania, the overall air quality will suffer,” said Logan Welde, a lawyer for the Clean Air Council.

Lawyers for the state’s Department of Labor and Industry answered the council’s suit on July 24, calling it premature because the RAC’s 2015 code decisions haven’t yet been distributed. The department has 90 days to distribute the directives, which were issued in late May.

Arguments on the department’s motion to dismiss the case have been scheduled for Sept. 2, but Welde said that he intends to ask for an extension because of scheduling issues.

A Labor and Industry spokesman said the department does not comment on pending litigation.