Inspectors required to cite code section

[ivsenroute]

I'ld have to respectfully disagree with this notion Mark.

I'll agree with the code being the minimum standard but if the installation follows that requirement there should be no reason for a citation. It's really black and white an installation is either code compliant or it isn't. Once we allow personal judgement to influence the inspection process it will make the process subjective and open to each individauls interpretation.

I concur. Personal opinion should have nothing to do with code compliance.

 

[bphgravity]

There are no provisions in the Florida Administrative Code that requires a cited code section or even an explanation for a rejected inspection. It is up to each indivual Building Code Administrator (CBO) to establish policy and procedure not directly outlined in the code or state law.

 

[jumper]

There are no provisions in the Florida Administrative Code that requires a cited code section or even an explanation for a rejected inspection. It is up to each indivual Building Code Administrator (CBO) to establish policy and procedure not directly outlined in the code or state law.

Wait a minute, you just get to say I failed/am in violation and that is it? I gotta a problem with that.

 

[Cold Fusion]

In the state I live, electrical inspectors are enforcement agents. That's right, a badge and a gun (although I have never seen one carrying a gun). The NEC is state law, and the inspectors are charged with upholding that piece of the state law.

Now, the OP is an inspector, a special agent of the AHJ, an enforcement agent, maybe even with arrest powers, and she thinks it is okay to shut down a job, because an inspector thinks the code does not allow a particular installation. After all the inspector is not a "walking code book".

Shutting down a job costs money. Not just the contractor, but eventually the owners as well. Continued application of this moron phillosophy increases the cost of projects.

The OPs's phillosophy appears to be:
1. The inspector need not be technically versed in their vocation;
2. It's okay for the inspector to shut down a job, costing all involve, simply because the inspector can not be bothered with checking the law they have been hired to enforce;
3. It is up to the contractor to research the issue, possibly employing mind reading skills to determine the inspector's perceived applicability and then petition to reverse the enforcement action.

Who knows, maybe the AHJ agrees with this practice and has the attitude of, "Yes that's what the code says. Our interpretation is (insert something blatently crosswise). By the way, our interpretation is the one that matters". I've certainly seen a few posts on here that appear to support this practice.

I find the entire concept technically incompetent, arrogant, demeaning, and morally bankrupt.


cf

 

[bphgravity]

There have been many occasions where my violation card says something to the effect of, "Not Ready, Inspection Stopped. Punch-out and hot-check. Recall Inspection when ready." However, this is rare. Some violations need only a brief description without an actual code section. Like, "Nail plates missing on living room block wall along fur strips." Other violations need only a code section for the matter to be clear. Like, "Master closet luminaire in violation 410.8."

Most jurisdictions I am familair with here in Florida require code sections to be cited unless the violation is a obvious and common. Many jurisdictions have a building department inspections policy manual that available for contractors and the public. Sometimes there is no official policy and can actual vary from inspector to inspector in the same jurisdiction.

 

[acrwc10]

Getting back on topic. There is no requirement in most states that require you quote a code section. If an inspector expects you to follow his correction citation, he had better have a code section to back it up. Because when push comes to shove he's going to look stupid if there is no section to back him up.

 

[K8MHZ]

I'ld have to respectfully disagree with this notion Mark.

I'll agree with the code being the minimum standard but if the installation follows that requirement there should be no reason for a citation. It's really black and white an installation is either code compliant or it isn't. Once we allow personal judgement to influence the inspection process it will make the process subjective and open to each individauls interpretation.

The problem is that there are times when the code is not black and white. If it were, why would there be the allowance for the AHJ to have interpretive rights in 90.4?

I will grant that if my experiences with 'the human element' were different, I may have an entirely different take. It's just that, so far, I have been in agreement with the decisions.

Also, I would be remiss if I did not mention that I never saw a citation for any of the inspectors decisions as we always worked things out long before the ticket book comes out.

Now, that is not to say I would never argue with an inspector if I thought he was not only wrong, but unreasonable.

I have found that communication can go far in getting a compliant job done efficiently. I have never had an inspector complain for me calling him up and asking him questions.

I don't see any need for an inspection to be confrontational. In fact, since I like to show off my work, I actually look forward to walking through a site with the inspector.

All I have worked with have been electricians at one time and know what it's like to be on the other side of the fence. Maybe that is why I have had so few issues with them.

 

[joebell]

The problem is that there are times when the code is not black and white. If it were, why would there be the allowance for the AHJ to have interpretive rights in 90.4?

I have found that communication can go far in getting a compliant job done efficiently. I have never had an inspector complain for me calling him up and asking him questions.

I don't see any need for an inspection to be confrontational. In fact, since I like to show off my work, I actually look forward to walking through a site with the inspector.

I agree that some sections of the code are left open to interpretation, I have no problem with that and look forward to discussing those situations with the AHJ. Much like following these threads on these forums , it's cool to see other peoples opinions/ Interpretations.

The problem I would have would be some perceived violation , that is code compliant, but because the AHJ didn't agree with the wiring method or whatever would cite it as a violation. That is an abuse in my opinion. Now I've been doing this work for 25+ years and in all that time I have only encountered this situation once and thankfully that inspector has since retired.

I also agree wholeheartedly that communication is HUGE, not only with AHJ's but with life in general. If more people would learn to talk to and not at people and if others would learn how to listen this world would be a much better place.



(stepping off my soap box )

 

[jumper]

The problem is that there are times when the code is not black and white. If it were, why would there be the allowance for the AHJ to have interpretive rights in 90.4?

I will grant that if my experiences with 'the human element' were different, I may have an entirely different take. It's just that, so far, I have been in agreement with the decisions.

Also, I would be remiss if I did not mention that I never saw a citation for any of the inspectors decisions as we always worked things out long before the ticket book comes out.

Now, that is not to say I would never argue with an inspector if I thought he was not only wrong, but unreasonable.

I have found that communication can go far in getting a compliant job done efficiently. I have never had an inspector complain for me calling him up and asking him questions.

I don't see any need for an inspection to be confrontational. In fact, since I like to show off my work, I actually look forward to walking through a site with the inspector.

All I have worked with have been electricians at one time and know what it's like to be on the other side of the fence. Maybe that is why I have had so few issues with them.

I have been lucky and most of my experiences have been similar; however, the inspector/fire marshal has to be able to cite a reference if requested.

I am not always able to be available for inspections, so at times I need a specific code and area to comply.

There seems to be a underlying hostility between inspectors and electricians, which I find regrettable.

I guess I am naive, I thought the idea was to be safe and make money. Why else would we be in this business? Not for the glamor, that I can tell you.

 

[joebell]

There seems to be a underlying hostility between inspectors and electricians, which I find regrettable.

I guess I am naive, I thought the idea was to be safe and make money. Why else would we be in this business? Not for the glamor, that I can tell you.

I don't understand that feeling either, it makes no sense.

 

[Mgraw]

There seems to be a underlying hostility between inspectors and electricians, which I find regrettable.

In my experience, for the most part, that is not true. I have had one bad inspector in 35 years. I work in multiple jurisdictions and all but one were/are easy to work with. Some try to "flex" their authority the first time I meet them but I usually end up getting along with them just fine. I think they usually want to get along with the people they deal with.

 

[Cavie]

I was never one for remembering all the code #'s. If I failed something and remembered the # I would provide it. If I knew the violation but not the # I would just state what the violation was. If they asked for the # later, I would gladly look it up and call them back and give it to them. Somedays doing 40 inspections in one day did not leave time to break out the book and look up all the #'s. Part 80 is not reconised in Florida.

 

[joebell]

I was never one for remembering all the code #'s. If I failed something and remembered the # I would provide it. If I knew the violation but not the # I would just state what the violation was. If they asked for the # later, I would gladly look it up and call them back and give it to them. Somedays doing 40 inspections in one day did not leave time to break out the book and look up all the #'s. Part 80 is not reconised in Florida.

Cavie,

40 inspections in one eight hour day? Thats about 12 minutes each not counting travel time, WOW thats a busy day.

 

[ivsenroute]

Personally, this is how I handle the situation. I live in a state that does not require specific code citations in notices of violation after a failed inspection:

Most of the time the EC is on the jobsite and we walk the project together. If I see a problem I mention it to the EC and write it down. 99 out of 100 times the EC usually says "Oops forgot that one, we will take care of it". Occasionally we get the response such as "What do you mean? I just did that in such and such a town and it passed". At that point, I will discuss it and write down the code section because I know this may become a problem since someone else was not doing their job.

I usually ask if they want the specific code cited and rarely get a "yes" from the EC. If there are a lot of violations and there is an attitude problem, I just cite the code sections.

Most of the time the EC is smart enough to know what is wrong and does not need us to tell them where to find the code section.

If there is ever a difference of opinion, I cite code sections.

We are doing way too many inspections per day to take the time to go back on every single job and look up code sections when no one wants them or needs them. The EC can look that up for themselves if they want to. Most of the time, it is not needed.

 

[ivsenroute]

Here is a perfect example:

My truck was being serviced so I had to take my car out on inspection. I threw in my inspection forms, clipboard and flashlight/screwdriver but forgot to put the code books in my car.

1st inspection was a wiring job for a circuit that was run to the 2nd floor of a SFR via PVC conduit outside. I opened up the LB on the outside of the home and found NM cable. I told the EC that NM is not allowed in wet or damp locations. He looked at me and said that the inside of the conduit is not wet or damp. I did not have my books so I could not remember that 300.9 applied but knew that this was not a compliant installation. I simply stated on the form that NM was not allowed inside the conduit run on the exterior of the house and failed the inspection.

Just because I did not have the code section does not relieve the EC of the fact that the installation was not compliant. I told him that I did not have my book on the jobsite and would be happy to look in his book. Of course they rarely have one on the jobsite so it was never written down.

At this point, I told him to please prove me wrong and I will be happy to change my mind. He could cite the code to me if he does not agree.

I have reversed my decisions more than once after someone brought something to my attention. None of us are perfect and we all make mistakes. I admit mine.

I guess what I am seeing on the posts in this board are people who think that a write up is not legitimate without a code citation and that simply is not true. Look it up yourself and you will learn why you failed or prove the inspector wrong.

 

[Cavie]

Cavie,

40 inspections in one eight hour day? Thats about 12 minutes each not counting travel time, WOW thats a busy day.

I know this sounds impossible but this was in 2006 and 2007, at the top of the boom before the fall. 17 electric inspectors in Lee County Florida building department. Over 50 inspectors over all in the department. 30 inspections a day was the norm. I saw plenty of 40 days. Back then every house built had a pool. That's 3 inspections just for a pool. 3 or 4 from Temp service to final electric. let's not forget the dock inspections. Service changes, Trailers, and all the reinspections because Florida does not have jurneymen electricans, Just trained bodys to run wire from point a to point b. Day labor was a big business in construction back then. That same department today is down to 4 electric inspectors. 10 inspections is a big day.

 

[joebell]

Here is a perfect example:

My truck was being serviced so I had to take my car out on inspection. I threw in my inspection forms, clipboard and flashlight/screwdriver but forgot to put the code books in my car.

1st inspection was a wiring job for a circuit that was run to the 2nd floor of a SFR via PVC conduit outside. I opened up the LB on the outside of the home and found NM cable. I told the EC that NM is not allowed in wet or damp locations. He looked at me and said that the inside of the conduit is not wet or damp. I did not have my books so I could not remember that 300.9 applied but knew that this was not a compliant installation. I simply stated on the form that NM was not allowed inside the conduit run on the exterior of the house and failed the inspection.

Just because I did not have the code section does not relieve the EC of the fact that the installation was not compliant. I told him that I did not have my book on the jobsite and would be happy to look in his book. Of course they rarely have one on the jobsite so it was never written down.

At this point, I told him to please prove me wrong and I will be happy to change my mind. He could cite the code to me if he does not agree.

I have reversed my decisions more than once after someone brought something to my attention. None of us are perfect and we all make mistakes. I admit mine.

I guess what I am seeing on the posts in this board are people who think that a write up is not legitimate without a code citation and that simply is not true. Look it up yourself and you will learn why you failed or prove the inspector wrong.

The first question that comes to mind is, why is there no code book on site? We have a code book on every site and in every truck. I would have no problem with this situation but I would have a code book there so you could show it to me. I've had several inspectors in the past be more than willing to take the time.

 

[Cavie]

The first question that comes to mind is, why is there no code book on site? We have a code book on every site and in every truck. I would have no problem with this situation but I would have a code book there so you could show it to me. I've had several inspectors in the past be more than willing to take the time.

Spanish language code books are hard to come by. Very few code books on site here.

 

[Cavie]

Cavie,

40 inspections in one eight hour day? Thats about 12 minutes each not counting travel time, WOW thats a busy day.

It helps when 10 or so of those inspections are in the same new track housing gated community. 5 pools 3 roughs 2 finals all in one truck stop. Door to door just like the postman. Some of those very houses I inspected back then are still sitting unfinished.

 

[joebell]

It helps when 10 or so of those inspections are in the same new track housing gated community. 5 pools 3 roughs 2 finals all in one truck stop. Door to door just like the postman. Some of those very houses I inspected back then are still sitting unfinished.

Thats still pretty impressive.