• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Splicing joists over bearing girder

jar546 said:
Sometimes the inspectors approve stuff like this without the approval of the Building Official so I can't agree with you. It just happened today to me where one of the plumbing inspectors overstepped their boundaries and the building manager contacted me because she knew what he suggested was wrong.
Click to expand...
Merely arguing that approved is approved....If someone is smart enough to tell me one of my inspectors is wrong, I would address that, but I am in the ICE court where that is likely a 0.05% chance and "mistakes" are probably more like 15%.....
 
steveray said:
Merely arguing that approved is approved....If someone is smart enough to tell me one of my inspectors is wrong, I would address that, but I am in the ICE court where that is likely a 0.05% chance and "mistakes" are probably more like 15%.....
Click to expand...
The severity is relevant. When a plumbing inspector specifically tells a contractor to use red ASTM E-84 only rated foam used in residential Type V construction to fill in an annular space around PVC pipe in a high-rise building for a concreted rated horizontal assembly, we have a problem. A big problem. We are not talking about an inspector allowing staples on NM cable to be 13" away from the device box.
 
jar546 said:
The severity is relevant. When a plumbing inspector specifically tells a contractor to use red ASTM E-84 only rated foam used in residential Type V construction to fill in an annular space around PVC pipe in a high-rise building for a concreted rated horizontal assembly, we have a problem. A big problem. We are not talking about an inspector allowing staples on NM cable to be 13" away from the device box.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a plan review issue....Why was the listed/ rated penetration not part of the plan set for the inspector to follow?
 
steveray said:
Sounds like a plan review issue....Why was the listed/ rated penetration not part of the plan set for the inspector to follow?
Click to expand...
It was a field change of location without a revision submitted. Still completely wrong of the inspector to specify a repair to begin with, let alone telling them to do something wrong.
 
jar546 said:
The severity is relevant. When a plumbing inspector specifically tells a contractor to use red ASTM E-84 only rated foam used in residential Type V construction to fill in an annular space around PVC pipe in a high-rise building for a concreted rated horizontal assembly, we have a problem. A big problem. We are not talking about an inspector allowing staples on NM cable to be 13" away from the device box.
Click to expand...
Time to shake a palm tree?


/?
 
I have always understood that from a legal perspective only the building official has the authority to approve. Building inspectors only have the authority delegated to them by the building official.
 
If an inspector "approves" an inspection, they are doing so on behalf of the BO.....

[A] 103.3 Deputies. In accordance with the prescribed
procedures of this jurisdiction and with the concurrence of
the appointing authority, the building official shall have the
authority to appoint a deputy building official, other related
technical officers, inspectors and other employees. Such
employees shall have powers as delegated by the building
official.
 
steveray said:
If an inspector "approves" an inspection, they are doing so on behalf of the BO.....

[A] 103.3 Deputies. In accordance with the prescribed
procedures of this jurisdiction and with the concurrence of
the appointing authority, the building official shall have the
authority to appoint a deputy building official, other related
technical officers, inspectors and other employees. Such
employees shall have powers as delegated by the building
official.
Click to expand...
Key phrase "...as delegated..."
Delegated to perform their job as an inspector or plans examiner. Not delegated to issue certificates of occupancy or other administrative duties that is outside the scope of the inspector or plans examiner licensing limitations. Specifying a repair that is not code compliant and required to be submitted by the design professional of record is not only wrong but completely outside the scope of their licensing.
 
So it is a training issue then? Still the BO's fault......I'm just tugging at you a bit Jeff....And more so making a point about how much we are supposed to be responsible for and how little actual ability we have to control the industry and what happens in the field...As Mark might say, "we are not legally responsible" we just lose our jobs and/ or careers.......This thread is way OT.....Surprised ICE hasn't locked it yet....
 
Iirc, Connecticut adopts the LSC and names the state fire marshall as the AHJ. Hard to believe that person reviews everything submitted for approval.
 
My guess is that there are quite a few building departments where there is little to no oversight of the inspectors.
 
I have trouble with an inspector saying approved and sometime later the building official showing up and saying not approved. Can't think that goes on much.
 
Mark K said:
My guess is that there are quite a few building departments where there is little to no oversight of the inspectors.
Click to expand...
There's plenty of oversight .... it's just not meaningful oversight. The typical building official has scant code knowledge. The BO knows if you are late for work but likely doesn't understand your latest work.

The qualifications desired for a building official includes a degree in a related field....business administration is a related field and if the candidate has a degree in any engineering discipline..welcome aboard. Building officials are politicians first and the AHJ second.

Every building official should have an assistant that is well versed in the codes. The assistant should be the mentor, disciplinarian and confessor. There needs to be a separation between the political aspect and the nuts and bolts of the department. If the BO knew what he was giving away it would grate on him.

Jeff is miffed with an inspector that allowed the use of the wrong fireblock material in a residential high-rise building. That is a serious mistake for a number of reasons....primarily, he's seen the correct method used many times and should know better....but also, there is a detail somewhere on the plans for fire blocking.

What Jeff hasn't acknowledged is the countless decisions made by all of the inspectors without a second opinion. Ask this question: are buildings falling down, burning up? ...are the occupants getting electrocuted or asphyxiated in their sleep? Apparently the system functions.

I really can't stress enough that the members of this forum have nothing in common with the majority of the practitioners of code enforcement. I have seen light.

Jeff knows too much code. That's a condition that causes those around him to feel inadequate. If you set the bar too high you're the only one to get over it....so get over it.

Remember Jeff, you are much appreciated....you created a forum for the aficionados (Google it fatboy) and you let me poke fun.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top