• 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

Stop the madness

ICE

ICE

Oh Well
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
12,918
Location
California
I'm sorry to say that this thread has been corrupted. The pictures have been deleted at Flickr so they are gone from here.

The largest solar outfit in CA has a terrible habit of leaving energized equipment wide open and unattended. An employee will have four and five inspections scheduled every day. He races around opening the equipment and leaning ladders. I show up and nobody is there. What troubles me is the obvious.
All of the pictures are from the street.








These are from today. I have stopped giving them inspections and they get a re-inspection fee instead.
 
Last edited:
How does CalOSHA feel about that? We are getting a strong push here now on ARC Flash and things like that where we will no longer be opening the panels for residential and Shirley not commercial and I have not figured out how to inspect switchgear that exceeds max PPE requirements....
 
It is understandable why a contractor wants to minimize labor, but not at the risk of someone getting seriously hurt or killed.
Can the electric utility in the area add some weight to not having panels wide open & unattended by "qualified" personnel?
 
My office manager waives any re-inspection fees and tells me that I can't withhold an inspection. I am told that it is none of my business if the contractor creates a dangerous condition. "We are not there to police the world."

It has spread to all but a few solar installation companies. I find them sitting in the truck or not there at all and the service is in the backyard....wide open. As you can see from the pictures, these services are sometimes in the front yard where any curious kid is at risk. They can wait until I get there and remove a single screw to remove the dead front but don't. I just don't get it.

CALOSHA tells me that they only have jurisdiction over employer/employee issues. Edison responsibility stops at the weather-head. The fire dept. says to call the building dept. The CSLB says the same. The Building Dept. says to lay off....to the point that if I persist I will be banned from inspecting solar. I can't wait.
 


It has happened many times since I started this thread. Each time I get the same story. Inspectors chew them out if the panel isn't open when they get there. XYY City requires this.

So I called XYZ City and asked the random inspector that got the phone call... I assumed the persona of a contractor. I asked him if he wanted the service open with the dead-front removed before he arrives. He said yes... especially if there will not be someone there to meet him because he doesn't carry a screwdriver. I told him that I would gladly give him Ruben's screwdriver.

Then I called the BO of XYZ City and asked him. He said Oh Hell no...somebody could get killed.

Inspectors that allow this practice should not be inspectors.
 
Tiger:

Back in the 50s I became friends with various inspectors, they all told me that it's a sign of respect that the contractor pulling the permit show up at all inspectors, when riding with one I noticed he always had a white shirt and tie hanging in his back seat, I asked why and he responded that he had to testify in court a few times per week and it was a show of respect to the courts to wear a tie. Once I had to run off and I told my foreman to apologize but I had to go and would be back later, when I did get back he was pouring concrete on a warehouse and I said: "I see Warren signed you off." He said: "No he didn't but he said to go ahead and pour but tell Dick I'll be back at 12:00 noon for lunch at Art's Buffet.

When I was doing expert work for the Contractors' License Board I insisted that the contractor of record meet with me, tract builders were the worst, they'd send the Subcontractor they thought responsible, I'd refuse to meet and tell them to make another appoint when the contractor whose name was on the permit could be present. I'll tell you why, I once had a case where 8' french doors weren't closing properly allowing air in across the tops, they sent the finish carpentry contractor who set the doors, I met with him and he blamed the framing contractor for the walls being out of plumb, my first impression was that they were just poor quality doors that had no protection from the weather and were warping, so the true responsibility was the general contractor who supplied the doors, neither the contractor who framed the building (it was actually within industry tolerances), nor the contractor who installed the doors, the doors were warping.

Recently I had a case with a new inspector, the inspectors had been rotated, I couldn't reach him by phone since I didn't know who his name yet, it was just a roof nailing inspection so I left the approved plans with my foreman and explained the multiple plans and cards, the AHJ issued new permits every time I made changes, I tried to explain how it all went together to my foreman, the next morning I asked the foreman if the inspector signed off the roof nailing and he told me no to call for another inspection. When the new guy showed up I explained all the multiple plans and permit cards and he asked me where to sign, I showed him and then asked my men to bring a long ladder for him, he said not to bother, he wasn't allowed to climb ladders. Obviously if he wasn't going on the roof there was no need to be there but he was just showing me who was the boss, we became friends and in the end he told me it was a pleasure working with me and he hoped I'd build another home in his jurisdiction.
 
8/15/16
It's the start of a new week and this is the first job that I refused to inspect because the service was like this with nobody there. Well in all fairness the guy that met me was in his truck.....out front and the service is in the rear.

 
Last edited:
ICE, all due respect, that guy looks more like a plumber.

Office manager here does not have the authority to waive permits or fees, I'd check that out. I'd persist..persist and persist some more if I could get out of solar inspections, but your the best man they got!:)

The suns always behind you when taken pictures! ....Just watch out for that boot!
 
One of my best friends has left my AHJ and gone to work in another jurisdiction. That municipality is way more strict in enforcing code. However he has discovered that it is expected that electric service panels will be left with dead-fronts removed and unattended exposed live parts. The contractor is not required to be onsite.

The lack of concern for this abominable practice dumbfounds me.

This thread has gotten scant attention while there is a time bomb waiting to go off. I am convinced that I am alone on this issue in Southern California.
 
Last edited:
Why not have them close the cover and install a plastic tie strap to secure the cover in the closed position. That will prevent someone from just opening the cover and accessing the energized parts. You cut the tie strap open the cover and install a new one when you are done.
Saves contractor time and money and makes it safer at the same time
 
Why do your jurisdictions let contractors get away with not being present for inspections? This is the bigger travesty to me, and would solve your problem with the fronts being off as well.

You're supposed to explain to Mrs. Suzy Homemaker what you want her contractor to do, and she's expected to remember enough of what you told her, AND be smart enough to relay it all correctly to her contractor? What kind of nonsense is that?
 
JCraver said:
Why do your jurisdictions let contractors get away with not being present for inspections? This is the bigger travesty to me, and would solve your problem with the fronts being off as well.

You're supposed to explain to Mrs. Suzy Homemaker what you want her contractor to do, and she's expected to remember enough of what you told her, AND be smart enough to relay it all correctly to her contractor? What kind of nonsense is that?
Click to expand...

Where we are, that would not necessarily be customer friendly...I just tell the contractors that if they don't mind me telling their customers all of their mistakes they don't have to be there....But even that is failing to motivate them these days. They are so bad that they don't understand how bad it is to be that bad at your job....
 
JCraver said:
You're supposed to explain to Mrs. Suzy Homemaker what you want her contractor to do,
Click to expand...
No you are suppose to write the corrections out (document) and post them where everyone can read them and then charge the re-inspection fee.
Sometimes it is good to have the contractor onsite and sometimes it is better if he is nowhere to be found during the inspection.

We have no problem removing the dead fronts as part of an inspection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ICE
We document everything. But when I give the contractors' copy to Mrs. Suzy Homemaker, she has no idea what the words on that little paper mean - she just assumes that either her contractor is incompetent and that she has to find another one, or that I'm an a$$hole and don't want her to have her new whatever and that the City just has to make everything harder for people.

Thankfully, we're not a very big town and all of our regular contractors know I expect them to be there for an inspection. It seems to work out better for everybody that way.

And I'm not removing anything for an inspection. I carry a tape, a couple levels, and a few different testers, but no other tools. If something needs removed, you're taking it off - I'm not touching it.
 
I guess I just can't get my head around "big city" inspections and the scheduling nonsense which leads to ICE's kind of problems. "Call by 4:00 to get an inspection between Noon and 5:00 tomorrow", and all that. In my little office, someone calls me and I go do their inspection. In the very worst case, they call me at 5 till 5:00 and I make them wait until the next morning...
 
We are not a "big city" by definition, but when you have an average of 12-15 stops a day each for 5 inspectors, you need some time assign and research.
 
I remove dead fronts but that is against policy. I understand why we aren't supposed to remove them and many of the inspectors probably shouldn't touch tools.

The open, exposed, live parts is all about being lazy, arrogant jerks. The inspector thinks he is so important that to wait thirty seconds for the contractor to remove a screw is an insult. The contractor can't be bothered with showing up for an inspection because he has better things to do. They don't mind risking the death of a stranger. When it happens everybody will cry foul....and carry on being jerks risking the next one.

I just don't get it. Oh I understand that "customer service" is more important than the inspection. I know that anything that will upset or delay a contractor will not be tolerated. I thought that killing citizens was over that line that we shouldn't cross. Apparently I thought wrong.

Everyone sees this issue for what it is. Everyone understands the danger. Hell's bells, my mother said I must be kidding. Then again, I am not aware of anyone having been electrocuted so perhaps I should shut up until there is an honest to goodness, stupendous electrocution.
 
Last edited:
A mobile home gets set in a city mobile home park where there was no requirements for inspections on the electrical hook up. Then later there's a mobile home engulfed in flames and a little girl dies. The City Councils then requires that the mobile homes get inspected before occupancy. First one I inspect had undersized service wires, no grounding system and Mr. Lincoln is found under a fuse in the box. On another inspection the electrical box had a piece of copper plumbing pipe used in place of a cartridge fuse. I don't claim to know everything about doing electrical inspections but I'm asked to enforce a family of I-codes and the electrician is typically only required to do one code.

Yes customer service is important and time is money, but asking that the dead front be off and the contractor's representative be present when doing an inspection is not to much to ask for IMO especially on an electrical inspection. If management would support the inspector's request, it is possible the re-inspection would be eliminated saving the entity $$ for sending out the inspector for second inspection.

My 2¢
 
Pcinspector1 said:
A mobile home gets set in a city mobile home park where there was no requirements for inspections on the electrical hook up. Then later there's a mobile home engulfed in flames and a little girl dies. The City Councils then requires that the mobile homes get inspected before occupancy. First one I inspect had undersized service wires, no grounding system and Mr. Lincoln is found under a fuse in the box. On another inspection the electrical box had a piece of copper plumbing pipe used in place of a cartridge fuse. I don't claim to know everything about doing electrical inspections but I'm asked to enforce a family of I-codes and the electrician is typically only required to do one code.

Yes customer service is important and time is money, but asking that the dead front be off and the contractor's representative be present when doing an inspection is not to much to ask for IMO especially on an electrical inspection. If management would support the inspector's request, it is possible the re-inspection would be eliminated saving the entity $$ for sending out the inspector for second inspection.

My 2¢
Click to expand...

I don't want any covers removed prior to my arrival. It takes less than minute to remove a dead front. I hear stories about inspectors complaining if the dead front isn't already off. I hear stories about inspectors that never look inside the enclosure. Whatever...if I walk on and find the live parts exposed and the worker is not standing next to it I want to walk off. It is a travesty that there should be a need to bitch about this. What has become of all the electricians? And more on point, where are all of the electrical inspectors?

You know, there's a few mistakes that serve as "tells". You making those mistakes tells me a lot about you.....electrician or inspector.
Leaving exposed live metal says so much more than you suspect. I really don't want to have much to do with you after that. I don't want to explain corrections.....forget me telling you the story of the twins and the beagle. I just want to send you back to the moment in time when you figured to become an electrician or inspector and then talk you out of it.
 
Last edited:
I have been battling the practice of leaving exposed live parts....to no avail. Last week I lost the war against this ignorance. An official policy directive has arrived that condones the practice. A service panel or any other equipment with the dead-front removed is deemed to not be a hazard as long as the contractor's representative is "on the premises".

I have never been a party to the discussion. One of the parameters to be worked out involved the definition of "on the premises". Sitting in a vehicle on the street has been accepted as "on the premises".....but how far down the street seems to matter. That will be a judgement call by the inspector.

Somehow, this is not a hazard as long as the workman is sleeping within three addressees of the address where I found it.



There's nothing to worry about here as long as the contractor can hear the screaming.





This, well this is altogether different. When this happens the inspectors are to contact a supervisor for further instruction.



The permit copy is tucked behind the service entrance conductors, awaiting my signature.






The consensus is that it is not the AHJ's problem to address....it is the contractor's problem and building departments do not police the industry. I have heard it said that the contractor's have insurance.....which of course makes all the difference.

No other authority has an interest in stopping this practice. That includes the Fire Dept., the Contractors License Board, and CalOSHA.

Being just an inspector, and fallible, I might be tilting at windmills.......or.......It happens all over Southern California. One dead child from now, the policy will change.
 
Last edited:
To me, on the premises, would indicate that the contractor is on the property. Why not just leave a single screw in the panel? That secures the panel, but reduces the time it takes to open it for the inspector. I can understand how some inspectors might be impatient, but a single screw does not take long to remove.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top