new ridiculous CA law for 2014

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sierrasparky

Sierrasparky

Senior Member
Location
USA
Occupation
Electrician ,contractor
for all you contractors who do residential work california.I think it's time you may want to turn in your license and go Under ground. It seems that in the infinite wisdom of the California legislation we have a new law that requires upon any permit any final from any permits of a single family residence all non water-saving faucets toilets shower heads in the entire house must be upgraded to low flow. Do you really think that somebody pulling a permit for a circuit or some outlets is going to want to spend thousands upgrading their entire plumbing system In their house.
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=200920100SB407
 
Last edited:
Truly astounding.
The legislation in question was passed back in 2009.
In some ways it is quite reasonable. If a demolition permit has been issued for a building you can delay the installation of compliant plumbing for up to one year!

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
 
GoldDigger said:
Truly astounding.
The legislation in question was passed back in 2009.
In some ways it is quite reasonable. If a demolition permit has been issued for a building you can delay the installation of compliant plumbing for up to one year!

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes this is truly astounding.
This frikin law requires the Permit APPLICANT to install those water savings devices.
actual text of the law.....

1101.4. (a) On and after January 1, 2014, for all building
alterations or improvements to single-family residential real
property, as a condition for issuance of a certificate of final
completion and occupancy or final permit approval by the local
building department, the permit applicant shall replace all
noncompliant plumbing fixtures with water-conserving plumbing
fixtures.Astounding is not the only word!:eek:hmy:
 
Well, I think it at least allows the applicant to hire a plumber instead of doing the work himself....

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
 
GoldDigger said:
Well, I think it at least allows the applicant to hire a plumber instead of doing the work himself....

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

And since when is it legal for a EC who contracts to replace a panel also subcontracts to a plumber. NOT LEGAL. :?
 
I found the link to this new law on the CSLB website under the new laws for 2014.
The CSLB knew of this. I am sure they intend to have a hand in there somewhere.
You give the authors too much credit.

In the history of the legislation it was opined that this law was and should be the pervue of the Buildings and standards Commish.
But in the wisdom of the author it was poo poo'ed and thus we have this rediculous law.
Just wait til the first HO does not get final and has to ripp out all the bathrooms because the new toilets do fit with the decor. Or have to replace some expensive faucets in the Master suite all because the EC pulled a permit to add a circuit for a new Micro. or the EC pulled a permit to install the new flat panel.
 
Sierrasparky said:
I found the link to this new law on the CSLB website under the new laws for 2014.
The CSLB knew of this. I am sure they intend to have a hand in there somewhere.
You give the authors too much credit.

In the history of the legislation it was opined that this law was and should be the pervue of the Buildings and standards Commish.
But in the wisdom of the author it was poo poo'ed and thus we have this rediculous law.
Just wait til the first HO does not get final and has to ripp out all the bathrooms because the new toilets do fit with the decor. Or have to replace some expensive faucets in the Master suite all because the EC pulled a permit to add a circuit for a new Micro. or the EC pulled a permit to install the new flat panel.
Click to expand...

i'm not a licensed plumber, so i can't do that work. sorry.

betcha this is one of those things that gets ignored like the lighting compliance...

in three years, there will be a CALCTP-AT-P certification so someone can come out and
make sure that chit indeed does flow downhill....

i'll start studying for the test in a month or so......

1. Water Flows:

A. Downhill
B. Uphill
C. Counterclockwise below the equator
D. Out of a boot, if you invert it.
E. Some of the above.

um.... um.... um..... crap. this is HARD!


edit:
i just texted this to the plumber who lives around the corner.

you have just made a man here very happy.:p
 
Last edited:
Fulthrotl said:
i'm not a licensed plumber, so i can't do that work. sorry.
Click to expand...

Yea that's the problem you are not license to perform the work. However the words of this new law state that the "APPLICANT shall replace all non-compliant plumbing fixtures."
So unless the HO pulled the permit you be on the hook and will be violating contracting law if you provided the service by
1- hiring a licensed plumber
2- doing the work yourself

That is unless you have a "B" license.

This law needs to find the trash can.
 
And you won't get a certificate of completion or final inspection which is going to hold up your money if you're the EC.

I hesitate to suggest your contract/ proposal/ etc disclaim the necessity of final inspection, after all, that's what inspections are for.

So what's the solution?
 
mgookin said:
And you won't get a certificate of completion or final inspection which is going to hold up your money if you're the EC.

I hesitate to suggest your contract/ proposal/ etc disclaim the necessity of final inspection, after all, that's what inspections are for.

So what's the solution?
Click to expand...

that is a poorly written law for sure.

FYI.....residential....my contracts state I get my final check when I complete my work. Final inspection set up after final payment. No homeowner has ever had a problem with this. It insures I receive final payment.
 
I will only say that the people of the state elected the officials that passed the laws:happyyes:

Hopefully the lawmakers and supporters of same laws run into conflicts of compliance themselves. Problem is like it is anywhere else, many of these lawmakers think that they don't have to comply with the same laws they are a part of making:(

Once heard a story from an electrical inspector about a state legislator that thought he was going to get service at a vacation home without a permit. Called the inspector his buddy, and pleaded he had a party coming up at the place the coming weekend or something like that. Inspector informed him they were never buddies, that he could get his permit (only takes a few minutes online) but it was very unlikely to pass inspection in the time requested so authorization to energize wasn't very likely, and if he wanted power for his party he'd be wise to start looking for a generator.
 
Sounds like Cali could benefit from a more participative industry association to stay on top of legislation and attend hearings. Those lawmakers are not trying to make your job hard, but they sure did because they don't have your perspective. Lobby the legislature now to amend it so they get what they want and you get what you want.

In Florida we have very active local and statewide industry organizations who do just that. We have lots of laws and they work like a sewing machine.
 
That assumes that he knew what it was about in detail.
It could have been a small part of a larger bill.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
 
mgookin said:
Sounds like Cali could benefit from a more participative industry association to stay on top of legislation and attend hearings. Those lawmakers are not trying to make your job hard, but they sure did because they don't have your perspective. Lobby the legislature now to amend it so they get what they want and you get what you want.

In Florida we have very active local and statewide industry organizations who do just that. We have lots of laws and they work like a sewing machine.
Click to expand...

You are correct about having an industry participate. There are a great many associations that do participate. However this particular law was forced through in 2009. The lawmakers intentionally sidesteped the normal proceedures CA has for Building codes. CA has a specific process to implement and vet its building codes. The whole process was bypassed. This law should be declared proceedurally unconstitutional as per CA.

As far as having our perspective , maybe but they really did not want our prospective because the law as written would not have passed if the Building industry was fully aware. Heck the law was created as a condition of transfer and sale of real property. When the Real Estate community created such a stink the lawmakers looked for another way to implement the rule. The Transfer portion was removed yet the title of the proposed law continued to state "TRANSFER"
These Lawmakers (lawbreakers) Should be subject to a public stoning.


When the Apartment owners found out they forced such language that helped them implement with less impact. The Building community seemed to be asleep at the wheel other than the plumbers. I missed it. I missed it because It was not a new Building code.

We have a proceess but it failed.
 
I'm sure any groups that are pushing natural resource conservation especially in CA, gets their point across fairly easily when legislation involving such conservation comes up, and the practicality side of the debate has a hard time even being heard. What costs will come from some of those laws seem to be unimportant to those that push them. The smaller group that is not heard maybe still has concerns about conservation, but also has the idea of lets look at this a little harder and come up with a better solution for all.
 
Did supporters of this law consider all the plumbing devices that they will put in landfills:eek:hmy:

Now I have done it, a mandatory law to recycle those items is coming and building inspectors are the ones that will have to enforce it somehow, and the unlicensed no permit handiman still has a job:happyyes:
 
kwired said:
Did supporters of this law consider all the plumbing devices that they will put in landfills:eek:hmy:

Now I have done it, a mandatory law to recycle those items is coming and building inspectors are the ones that will have to enforce it somehow, and the unlicensed no permit handiman still has a job:happyyes:
Click to expand...

Hopefully the old fixtures will go to scrapyards (not landfills) and be recycled.:thumbsup:
 
Focus!

Focus!

I think you need to keep focused on your business model. Boiler plate the plumbing specification to be done by others at an additional cost; or get associated with a plumber or a price list and an agreement with the property owner that the plumbing is extra. If there are changes let the owner do it or have it in line to be done at an additional cost plus basis.

I have a friend who is an AC contractor that has a clause that any other work not specifically included in the work order will cost extra. You might have to rephrase the work order from "Permit, labor and materials for 200 amp service" to "Permit labor and materials for 200 amp service, plumbing performed by ajax plumbing at a cost plus 10%" ...... etc

A nice easy $200 on a $2000 invoice from the plumber.


Cha CHING!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top