Inspecting...Plan or Code?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ryan_618

ryan_618

Senior Member
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah
I would enjoy hearing some opinions about whose responsibility it is to verify that plans are followed.

For example, I recently reviewed plans for a large retail store, and one of the conditions on the plan was that all conduit systems and wiring methods be installed above ground, ie, not in or under the slab.

So, when I go out to inspect this job and they have installed underground wiring methods, in a code compliant manner...what is the inspector to do? Should he/she tell the engineer about it? Is it the inspector's concern if it done to code? Should the engineer verify compliance with his/her own design? What do you think?
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

Ryan, I hate to see you start threads. Your questions make it so difficult to make an easy response. :D
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

Ryan ,i think this answer is easy.My understanding is you are a county or town inspector.From your posts you seem to know the codes very well.So you get paid to do what ? Inspect the job for code compliance and nothing more.Yours is not to suggest better ways or worry about them following what some arc. wants.Most large projects have a super.Following the specs is his job along with monitoring quality and scheduling.Let him worry about the details.
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

I'm with Jim if the job is done, not to specs but in code complaince, what can the inspector do, I would think the liability would go to the electrical contractor and the GC for not following specs,JMO, so Ryan what would you do.
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

Sometimes the "plans" will have to change on the fly...

A new office building my cousin was working in doing plumbing showed a big 1' pipe going somewhere. But its plan position had it going right through the web of a major support I beam. An apprentice tasked to layout the run rounded up a torch and burned a huge hole through the I beam web so the run could pass through it :p

Any changes made should be reflected on the plans though so the next guys know where the heck thing are.
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

This might pertain to this situation altho I had little to do with it.
We did a tenant improvement project and the plans were approved by the planning department for four 220v air handlers. Things changed and two of the air handlers were changed to 120v so we put in smaller breakers. The inspector noticed the discrepancy and didn't approve the job. So there was some office work that went on and I guess the plans had to be resubmitted for plan check.
So I suppose Ryan's response would be to raise a stink because the work wasn't in accordance to the approved plans.
~Peter
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

In most cases this would be an issue between the contractor and the architect/engineer if the work is not installed per the plans and/or specifications and would not be the AHJ's call unless there was a violation.
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

Ryan, are you sure the plans you reviewed are in fact current? Updating your set may have been the last thing someone would have thought of if an "oops" occurred and was discovered by the plumbers or structural guys and had to be done in a hurry to keep work moving.
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

Ryan;

One of the problems with the Plans we all use in the field, is the use (more like abuse) of "Boilerplate" items - such as General Notes, Symbol Legends, and even some Specs listed on Plan Sets.

They are included "As-Is", but may not 100% apply to the Project or Contract Documents shown.
In other words, the "Boilerplate" may have been used on another Project, and is used again for this Project - but not edited to apply as needed.

Another option (most common) is the referenced notes are from "Boilerplates" purchased from outside sources, or an "All-Inclusive Boilerplate" is made within an EE firm, which contains all kinds of specs, and is used by the Design EE "As-Is" for quick and simple insertion into a Plan Page.

To correctly verify something like what you have mentioned (no underground/underfloor runs), the spec notes on Contract Plan Set(s) would need to be included within the Project Manual, and / or verified by an RFI to the responsible designer(s).
Plus the Contractor needed to bid the Project accordingly + be aware of this prior to submitting the proposal and accepting the Project / signing the Contract.

If I have such a Specification on a Project's installation, it will be addressed in separate note areas, along with being found in the Project's Specification Manual.

I do not use "General" type boilerplates with my Plan Sets. Each General note and Spec. note line is a stand-alone separate entity, which gets inserted as needed.
Same goes with Symbol Legends - only symbols + descriptions for relevant items are included in the legends.
Nothing sucks more than trying to figure out where some special item's symbol is used, then finding out it's never used!

Having to deal with ambiguous plan sets for so long in my career taught me "what not to do" more than "what to do".
My E sheets are cleaner, easier to read and interpret, plus contain data as it pertains to each Project.
This really reduces confusion, loss of time, production and $$$ for all involved with the project.

Just my $0.02

Scott35
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

Oh, forgot to add a crazy example situation, which just so happened to conflict with "No Underground / Underslab runs" notes on an E sheet from an EE firm:

One of our infamous "Blunders in Electrical Engineering" examples comes from a normal Bank Branch T.I. project's Electrical Power Plan - dating back to the mid 1980's.

On the same page where floor boxes and underslab conduits are shown to be installed new, the boilerplate Specific Notes #4 states:
"No underground or underslab / in-slab Conduit runs, or in-floor outlet boxes / raceway systems to be installed new or re-used"

It's impossible to install outlets on platform desks without them being floor mounted in some method!
Also, nearly all Teller Lines need to be fed via floor mount access, and this job was no exception!
An RFI was sent, which got all kinds of attention. Ended up with the EE firm having to deal with numerous Nasty Grams from the Client + the Architect - needless to say that certain EE firm didn't do this again...

Scott35
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

Scott you are right, a lot of drawings do come with specs that have nothing to do with the current construction.
I don't think you have to get involved with minor adjustments on the plan.

Ryan
I said that so I could say this.
In my city It's in my electrical code, but more than likely would be found in the building code it self. That doing work, contrary to the drawings or plans as approved by the appropriate departments is in violation of the code.
This guards against changes with out the inspectors approval.
If the parties involved don't object and it meets code I don't think I get involved, but it doesn't hurt to question it.
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

Ryan,
I have seen this note many times. But what would then happen is the project would come in over budget and the contractor would offer up a value engineering alternative (a term that is used way too much) to save the owner money by running in or under the slab. The owner then takes the savings (which at this point are generally only 60% to 70% of what it is worth) and the contractor then installs the conduits underground. The drawings don't get changed because the owner doesn't want to pay the engineer to redraw and the contractor is told to note the changes on the as-built drawings.
If you would like to note it on your inspection slip that would be O.K. but I think that is as far as you should take this issue.
-Ed
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

ryan,
touchy subject, so here is my 2 cents worth.
if you are given a set of plans to go by, you build to that spec. each deviation of the plans require a sign off sheet of acceptance for that deviation. if the contractors totally ignored the prints, with no sign off sheets, the job should fail. code compliant or not. the designer of the plans must of had a reason for specifying above ground installation.

also, with today's legal system, if you pass the installation and something goes wrong, it could come back on you for failing to notify the designer of the installation violation. even though it may not be your job, i would still notify the designer of the installation and let them come to an agreement (in writing and a copy given to you for your records) before passing the installation.
tennessee's new code requires that all deviations and ahj's rulings accepting the wiring methods are to be in writing. 5 years from now, we will still know why something was passed by the ahj.

best wishes,
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

In my jurisdiction I require anything that differs by the approved plans be resubmitted for approval by the electrical engineer or architect that stamped the prints in the first place. There maybe a reason to the engineer or owner not to go undergroud or in a certain type raceway. Under Article 80.21(C)(3) this permits us to require this.
As I the AHJ keep a copy of these plans in our vault for the future owners or building we require the as builts.
Doug
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

I?m getting into this one late, but that won?t stop me from having an opinion. So here it is: Of all the entities that are participating in the processes of design, installation, and inspection, the one and only entity with a right to object to a ?code-compliant-but-not-plan-compliant? installation is the owner. It is common for owners to hire the services of an engineering company or a construction management company to look after their interests. But the interests are those of the owner, and of no one else. The degree to which an owner can compel the contractor to perform additional work (i.e., to run new conduit above ground) or to give a credit (i.e., because of the cost savings the contractor has gained) is a function of the contract itself.

By the way, if the conduits were already covered by dirt and concrete floor by the time you came to do your inspection, how do you know they were installed in a ?code-compliant manner?? Isn?t there a requirement that the contractor arrange for an inspection prior to covering the conduits?
 
Re: Inspecting...Plan or Code?

If you are inspecting a small dwelling, maybe there are 3 pages of electrical prints, and a page of outdated specs. Now you go to the 40,000 sq ft building with one tenant and there are countless pages and specs. Other than code you could be there for weeks looking at the specs and prints for spec deviations, and who knows what has been changed on that job in that time. As Bob has said in the bigger jobs there are engineers and GCs who will let us know (most of the time) if we have deviated.
I do not see how checking for deviations from the plans if code compliant is the electrical inspector's responsibility. There is a job for Morgan Stanely in progress here that is 750,000 sq ft including the parking structure (4-13,800v primaries feed the building), I want to see if you can find the deviations, inspect the job ... and maybe have a life :D

Pierre
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top