Can AHJ Enforce 2008 NEC?

Status
Not open for further replies.
cschmid said:
power company loves MWBC..:grin:

So what portion would you like to discuss the cost savings or what the NEC bases code on safety of the unqualified..
Click to expand...

How about discussing the unqualified. I propose Tamper Resistant panel boards and junction, device, and fixture boxes. If the unqualified try to open one of them, then a shunt trip breaker shuts the whole service down. There you go - fool proof! :cool:
 
radiopet said:
....the state allows the engineer or master electrician submitting plans to choose to design in the 2002 or 2005 NEC for one year...
Click to expand...
Really???? :-? I did not know that! :roll: Statewide, you say? :smile: Cool! :cool:
 
Minuteman said:
How about discussing the unqualified. I propose Tamper Resistant panel boards and junction, device, and fixture boxes. If the unqualified try to open one of them, then a shunt trip breaker shuts the whole service down. There you go - fool proof! :cool:
Click to expand...


I am with larry just as soon as you come with that they will bread a new style fool..
 
cschmid said:
I am sure there is a law against that as well..
Click to expand...
Sorry, I have to jump in on this one, why would politicians make a law prohibiting themselves from breeding? It's what they're good at!:grin: And all their constituents wouldn't reelect them...:roll:

Back to the OP, find on the permit, or the drawings, where it says something to the effect of "Permitted, Installed and Inspected under the 200X code", and take that to the HMFIC at the building department, get something in writing from them stating that it shall be enforced in that manner.
 
km5qd said:
Home runs per 2005 9 circuits, 3 neutrals, 1 ground all #12 in 3/4" emt.
Home runs per 2008 9 circuits, 9 grounded conductors 1 ground all #10 in 1" emt.
Click to expand...

I do not have the 08 code book yet, so I do not understand what the change is.
Why is this a problem, and what has changed?
 
DanZ said:
Sorry, I have to jump in on this one, why would politicians make a law prohibiting themselves from breeding? It's what they're good at!:grin: And all their constituents wouldn't reelect them...:roll:

Back to the OP, find on the permit, or the drawings, where it says something to the effect of "Permitted, Installed and Inspected under the 200X code", and take that to the HMFIC at the building department, get something in writing from them stating that it shall be enforced in that manner.
Click to expand...

LMAO.......
 
jbfan74 said:
I do not have the 08 code book yet, so I do not understand what the change is.
Why is this a problem, and what has changed?
Click to expand...
It's not any specific code cycle, just the generalization that a job may be designed and priced in compliance with a certain code year, and a code change can alter the requirements enough to change the cost of certain aspects of a job.

For example, the new requirement that all MWBC's have handle-tied handles for manual disconnection. It looks like the only cost is the handle-ties themselves, but a customer might not want to have to de-energize all circuits to kill one.

That means the cost of separate cables or a larger size and/or quantity of conduits (to house the increase in quantity of current-carrying conductors to supply the same loads) would have to be added to the price, plus the added labor.

Or a simpler example: how about the cost of AFCI breakers required in a house? Bedroom receptacles only, all bedroom outlets, or all general-use outlets? The code cycle a job was engineered and/or priced under can affect the cost of a given job.
 
Thanks Larry. It was the change about the handle ties on mwbc that I did not know about. I can understand how that woould change the scope of the job now.
 
jbfan74 said:
Thanks Larry. It was the change about the handle ties on mwbc that I did not know about. I can understand how that woould change the scope of the job now.
Click to expand...
Again, that's just one example. Another is the difference between "available" and "present" Ufer electrodes.
 
I have yet to meet with the inspector. We are almost done with the rough-in. I will discuss matters with him at that time. According to my attorney, this would fall under the "ex post facto law". The inspector will be unable to enforce the 2008 code on this job. I willpost again about this when the inspection is done.
 
km5qd said:
I have yet to meet with the inspector. We are almost done with the rough-in. I will discuss matters with him at that time. According to my attorney, this would fall under the "ex post facto law". The inspector will be unable to enforce the 2008 code on this job. I willpost again about this when the inspection is done.
Click to expand...


I am sure if you jump on him with my attorney said you are going to spend some extra cash even if he is wrong..
 
Stick to your guns!

Stick to your guns!

km5qd said:
I have yet to meet with the inspector. We are almost done with the rough-in. I will discuss matters with him at that time. According to my attorney, this would fall under the "ex post facto law". The inspector will be unable to enforce the 2008 code on this job. I willpost again about this when the inspection is done.
Click to expand...

km5qd:

As an AHJ (when my signature is on a document for our office, which has statutory AHJ), in CT, I cannot enforce the "new" once the permit is issued on the "old" code. If it's close to a code cycle change, we will have a chat during plan review or permitting to see who's on which base, etc.

In CT, the ultimate answer is the State Fire Marshal or State Building Officials' Offices and their appeal boards. They are the ultimate authority. Any contractor, AHJ, etc. may contact them directly to confrim a question like this. If needed, appeal may be made to them. This incurs less cost then lawyers and letters and such. Once the State speaks up, the local AHJ must and will come in line. Most AHJs I am familiar with are pretty good and may just be making an error in trying to follow the changes too closely.

I'm not saying this will make a loving relationship with some inspectors, but it will settle the question then and there. If the inspector gets grumpy and ratchets up the heat after that happens, get right back on the phone to the state, they are good here about helping out. At least here they are!

Good Luck! :D
Mike
 
mdshunk said:
You'd really have to research your own state's laws, but I always thought that pretty much every state enforced the codes that were in force when the permit was pulled. This is why you often see a surge in permits issued right before new codes are slated to take effect. In your case, I'd spend the minimal fee it will cost to have an attorney check to see for sure and have him send a letter to the AHJ. I'd be really surprised if what they're telling you they're going to do is legal.
Click to expand...

If it is a large job that requires engineering the job the documentation will most likely reflect the Code in force at the design stage or even more importantly what was in force at the time of the E&D Contract. If the AHJ is unwilling to accept that then it would represent a serious impediment to fair conduct of business therefore impinging on Federal Regulations.

The above is one of the reasons why OSHA did NOT adopt the latest versions of either the Code nor 70E at the time they have issued their latest ruling on 1910 Subpart S.

Something to think about.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top