• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Problems with the industry

jar546

jar546

Forum Coordinator
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
11,087
Location
Somewhere Too Hot & Humid
One of the biggest complaints by contractors is the inconsistency of inspectors. One of the biggest problems that inspectors face is inconsistency from other inspectors. Here is one example that I would like to elaborate and sort of provide a breakdown of my opinion on the situation.

You arrive at a jobsite for an inspection to perform a service inspection. You notice 2 things right off the bat. 1) There is no intersystem bonding terminal installed and 2) There is only 1 ground rod installed.

So rather than assume these are violations, you politely ask the contractor some questions. 1) I don't see the intersystem bonding terminal. Did you install it inside? and 2) I see you only have 1 ground rod. Is there a CEE connection inside or did you do a resistance check and have <25 ohms of resistance to ground?

Your responses are as follows:

1) What is an intersystem bonding terminal?

2) What do you mean? What is a CEE?

After explaining NEC 250.94 to the contractor, you then tell him that a CEE is a concrete encased electrode and if he already has a connection to one then he did not need the ground rod anyway. If the ground rod and water pipe is the only connection then you need a 2nd rod unless you proved <25 ohms resistance (very expensive meter by the way)

The next response from the contractor is:

"I have installed 20 services this year so far and you are the first one to even mention 250.94 and the ground rod thing. How come inspectors in the other towns don't write these things up?"

And we are off. The electrician either does not know his job or knows what they can get away with in other towns and wants to try it in this one now too. I can only assume that the other inspectors are either not actually performing the inspections, don't know the requirements themselves or take it upon themselves to intentionally remove that code section because of their personal opinion. The last one is the one that pretty much causes lots of problems although all the reasons are scary.

So now the next thing out of the contractor's mouth is:

"All of you guys have different interpretations for these gray areas"

?????????????? WTF over???? What gray area are we talking about here. There are some gray areas of the NEC and for sure there are 2 very specific areas that are subjective to the inspector but these items are pretty rock solid black and white.

So as inspectors I thin we have to:

1) Try to use as much objectivity as possible as the code is written.

2) Take into consideration the "intent" of the code when grayish.

3) Leave the personal opinions at home before you come to work.

4) Realize that we are not perfect and listen when challenged. You may learn something.

5) Be consistent with everyone. Fair and consistent is the key.

Thoughts on this one?
 
Along these lines in my OP are the phone calls we get:(btw, we have a state-wide code 2009)

1) Do you require a smoke detector in the basement for this new home? Some of you guys do and some don't and I want to know what you want in your town.

2) Is it true that you require arc fault protection and tamper proof receptacles? I just need to know how to bid this job.

3) I heard that you require the plumbing to be tested, even in the winter. I just wanted to make sure that you required this so I know if I have to call for an inspection or not.

Yeah, we are very consistent aren't we?
 
Same issues here Jeff.....What do YOU require in your town?...I don't require anything.....the State Building Code requires it.....I have plumbers here tell me that they have not been required to test their plumbing in a remodel (think dormer addition) in 20 years! I tell them I must have missed that code section and exception...I am by no means perfect, and I encourage the contractors to challenge (discuss) things with all of the AHJ's they work with...had Home Depot call the other day and ask why my town requires tempered glass in a window <24" from a door...it's ok though, because they usually don't call for a final inspection anyway!
 
Unfortunately, untill we inspectors become perfect human beings, there will be inconsistencies. A big challenge facing many jurisdicitons (at least back in the day of big growth everywhere) is not enough time to properly conduct a complete inspection. Sometimes you have to look for the high points, the big issues, do your best, and get on to the next inspection.

Having said all of the above - I spend very little time - if any - explaining to a contractor why I am enforcing ALL of the code, when perhaps a very black and white issue was missed or overlooked in another town, on another job, or perhaps even last time I was out. I've been doing this inspecting thing over 20 years now - I still miss stuff. I try to get better every year, and we change codes every three years, so its a moving target.

"Mr., Mrs, or Ms. contractor -- Here's the section in the code book -- please call for a re-inspection when you have corrected this issue. Thank you very much, and have a nice day."
 
The truth is that some jurisdictions don't have the resources as other jurisdictions, don't have the technical knowledge of other jurisdictions, and don't do the same inspections, look for the same items, or recognize the same deficiencies. I think it is more that than purposely evading the requirements.

I do structural, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, energy, septic, wetlands, and and every other type of inspection there is, and I can guarantee I don't see or recognize all or even most issues. So what are ya gonna do, , , you do what you can. The contractors must meet code whether or not the inspector sees it or agrees with it.

The only exception is when the BO accepts an alternate method of compliance and that should be formally notated for the file.
 
I have inspectors right beyond my jurisdiction lines, that will do an elec service for 75 cash and the contractor can swing by their office and pick up the green tag for the panel.
 
We are a small jurisdiction. Do we catch everything...? No! Do we do the best we can? Yes! Now since I said that..... In Texas there are very few State adopted codes so that leaves each jurisdiction to adopt OR not adopt any code they feel necessary.

We are under the 2008 NEC and the 2009 I-Codes. A jurisdition adjacent to us is inder the 2002 NEC and the 2000 I-Codes. They are probably not even aware that the State has adopted specific codes. Quit a bit of difference in those codes.

So until the great State of Texas decides to require jurisdictions to adopt specific codes we will always have the problems you speak of.
 
There is a difference between which version of a code is adopted and incompetence.

Sometimes, jurisdictions do not adopt the latest and greatest because they do not feel every code cycle results in improved codes (this is our feeling). We are blessed to work in a state where things are so f-ed up that it's a good thing only the plumbing and energy code are state-wide.

Sometimes, other inspectors have never attended a class or cracked a book. Sometimes, the contractor is testing you. Sometimes the contractor is a liar. Sometimes the contractor is as incompetent as the other inspector.

Your mileage may vary. Read and follow all manufacturer's instructions. Wear your safety glasses. Void where prohibited by law.
 
* * * *



Jeff,



There are a lot of variables to your questions.....As "Yankee" pointed out,

every jurisdiction does not have the same amount of resources available

to them........Lack of funding, ...lack of time, ...lack of desire to want to

continue to learn the continuously moving target of code changes, ...trying

to obtain CEU's, ...lack of support from your employer [ moral & financial ],

trying to understand the codes enough to be able to "consistently" apply

them, and on and on and on and on.



From the very small per centage of contractors that actually want to comply

with the adopted codes here, they actually ask questions, ...earnestly seek

workable solutions while meeting the intent & letter of the codes, ...yes,

vent a little also [ The "venting by a contractor / homeowner" is a

crucial & valid part of the working relationship between them and me......Just

part of the Learning Curve by both parties I believe. ]



For the remainder of the contractor community [ here ],....(1)....it is easier

to ask for forgiveness than permission,.....(2).....they can & DO go to the

"Do you know who I am" card and "Who do I need to call" card, or burn

the roads & telephones up trying to get to the Mayor & council members

to vent and then have me crucified, tarred, feathered, vetted and then

terminated, ...ya know, `cause it's all about them!

IMO, there will never be a consistent application of the codes, regardless

of how they are written.

As others have stated, ya try to do the best you can, with what you

have to work with. :agree

Yes, try to be as consistent & fair as you can.



* * * *
 
I'll add, it it also very frustrating to have the "neighboring jurisdiction" thrown in your face, and when you call the neighbor to hopefully confirm that they do in fact enforce the code, you get the reply "well, we don't enforce that section of the code, we don't think it's fair to business". We're talking mandatory language here folks, not "fairness" or "interpretation".........grrrrr.......
 
fatboy said:
I'll add, it it also very frustrating to have the "neighboring jurisdiction" thrown in your face, and when you call the neighbor to hopefully confirm that they do in fact enforce the code, you get the reply "well, we don't enforce that section of the code, we don't think it's fair to business". We're talking mandatory language here folks, not "fairness" or "interpretation".........grrrrr.......
Click to expand...
:agree (text added for 10-character thingy)
 
In our case, it is the same requirement in every town since it is a state mandated code right down to the code cycle so there really is no excuse. I would not have a problem if there were different code cycles but we are all the same so this is an issue. Let's not let this issue drift into something else. When all are suppose to be the same and we have major problems with black and white code requirements, it causes problem.
 
fatboy said:
I'll add, it it also very frustrating to have the "neighboring jurisdiction" thrown in your face, and when you call the neighbor to hopefully confirm that they do in fact enforce the code, you get the reply "well, we don't enforce that section of the code, we don't think it's fair to business". We're talking mandatory language here folks, not "fairness" or "interpretation".........grrrrr.......
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter what the neighbor says or does. Skip the "holyer than thou" attitude, say "thank you very much for your time" and hang up the phone. We don't need to be picking each other apart, we don't all need to have the same perspective or skin the cat the same way.
 
...plus, some states do not have a mandatory statewide requirement for adopting any

building codes. Mine does not! :banghd

.
 
The only thing "holier than thou" is inspectors that take it upon themselves to interject their opinion and allow non-compliant installations that they are suppose to be enforcing. That is what brings the industry down. It is one thing for a state to amend the code and another when someone has the "do as I say, not as the code says" attitude or thinks this job is all about keeping people happy vs doing what is right.
 
All valid comments IMHO.

Remember when I went to building codes classes for over a year to become somewhat of a beginner in this business 18 years ago. Most of us came from some type of construction background. Instructor was explaining the 91 UBC one paragraph at a time. Then he'd asked who was doing it that way in the field. Maybe one or two hands and a few of the rest of us used the polish slap across the forehead when someone would say oh that's why it should have been done. Hasn't changed but is getting better.
 
:banghdJar: I am dealing with legislation brought forward by one contractor who didn't like the upgrades he had to do in a remodel. He wants the burden of proof placed on the jurisdiction that there are life safety, actually 'significant' life safety issues and he wants it stated on the permit. The first response from an ICC Governmental liaison was : 'who was the rogue inspector.' That put my hackles up, and I asked, who said anything about a rogue inspector? Was it a rogue contractor? Well, the discussion continues and I am still opposed to a bill that takes away an inspector's or city's right to go to the code book and point out the black and white issue. Granted, there are some grey areas, but I haven't found them to be of significance, yet. My position is that if it's grey, then we should err on the side of caution and safety. Do we have rogue inspectors? YES. I know of several who say: 'do what you want, I don't care.' or 'We're not enforcing that part of the code.' Do they help our profession.:banghd Not in the least. How do we correct it? Don't we have professional organizations for that very reason? ICC Chapters should be willing to police themselves and censure their own and also EDUCATE THEIR OWN. If more inspector groups stepped up to the plate to educate their ranks, this problem might be diminished greatly. :p
 
FredK said:
All valid comments IMHO. Remember when I went to building codes classes for over a year to become somewhat of a beginner in this business 18 years ago. Most of us came from some type of construction background. Instructor was explaining the 91 UBC one paragraph at a time. Then he'd asked who was doing it that way in the field. Maybe one or two hands and a few of the rest of us used the polish slap across the forehead when someone would say oh that's why it should have been done. Hasn't changed but is getting better.
Click to expand...
Geez, it has been 18 years! Same here, class of about 50, most of us had some familiarity and came from the various trades. My county counterpart doesn't have the AS as he got his experience 'on-the-job'. Who is better educated? Neither one of us cares, we just try to enforce the code as written and back each other up. When I first got here, heard a lot of 'we've always done it this way' and '_____ at the county lets me do this'. United front between the two of us got most of this nonsense stopped.

Sue, where the west still lives.........
 
Ok, to continue to play the devils advocate, when I walk into a job that has 103 non-compliant items, I am going to address those that have the the biggest impact on safety, and I might pick a couple more, but I am not going drop a slip that asks for 103 fixes. I am going to ask for the fixes in the amount I think the contractor can wrap his mind around. It isn't because I don't want them all fixed, it's because enforcement doesn't work without education and eduction doesn't work if nobody is listening. I never say "that's wrong, but don't fix it". I simply pick the ones we'll be addressing that day. Next time I see the contractor, we can work on another batch of items. That's the real world as I see it.
 
"Ok, to continue to play the devils advocate, when I walk into a job that has 103 non-compliantitems, I am going to address those that have the the biggest impact on safety, and I might pick a couple

more, but I am not going drop a slip that asks for 103 fixes. I am going to ask for the fixes in the amount

I think the contractor can wrap his mind around. It isn't because I don't want them all fixed, it's because

enforcement doesn't work without education and eduction doesn't work if nobody is listening. I never

say "that's wrong, but don't fix it". I simply pick the ones we'll be addressing that day. Next time I see

the contractor, we can work on another batch of items. That's the real world as I see it."
Click to expand...
Then why go to the effort of citing 103 discrepancies. No disrespect intended Yankee, but that

sounds like selective enforcement, which BTW, IS real world applicability. Again, no disprespect

intended, just seeking clarity.

As others have stated and elaborated to, this is a real world can of worms. Interesting topic

though!

Back to it...
 
Big Willie said:
Then why go to the effort of citing 103 discrepancies. No disrespect intended Yankee, but thatsounds like selective enforcement, which BTW, IS real world applicability. Again, no disprespect

intended, just seeking clarity.

As others have stated and elaborated to, this is a real world can of worms. Interesting topic

though!

Back to it...
Click to expand...
Not suggesting that 103 get cited. Suggesting that one selectively chooses which deficiencies will get cited that day. Yes, it is selective, that's why as inspectors we need to be able to prioritize. I don't think that is a negative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top