Looking for Inspectors Opinion.

[William1978]

my opinion on the matter;

it is the job of the EC to make sure the rough-in installation will meet code when finished. the inspector should only check that what is installed at the inspection meets code requirements. i don't think inspectors should be wasting time measuring wall spaces and verifying everything on the prints at rough-in. if it is a written requirement of the inspection department that they do so, then so be it. its very easy to overlook something when the walls are still open, i have found. i don't think the inspection dept. should be liable if something comes up missing during the final. it was the EC's job to put it there, and the inspectors job to make sure it was compliant.

I look for rec spacing on rough and make sure that there all the required cir's are installed, check to see if smokes are feed from an AFCI cir and that they are wired in tandom. If I see something that will be a problem on final i'll turn the job down because I would rather turn it down at this time than at final because it just wrong to wait till sheetrock and paint is on the wall.

 

[220/221]

Is it your responsibility on rough inspection to make sure everything is to code before sheetrock is installed

I'm a contractor, not an inspector but I say NO.

It's the contractors job to see that it's done right. There is NO way that an inspectors is going to be able to inspect EVERYTHING.

 

[stickboy1375]

I'm a contractor, not an inspector but I say NO.

It's the contractors job to see that it's done right. There is NO way that an inspectors is going to be able to inspect EVERYTHING.

Exactly, IMO, its an inspectors job to inspect what has BEEN installed, not what should be installed. This was my whole point, I gave the 2' wall example because it was an easy one, but where would the inspector draw the line at the rough?


I thing I raised my bosses blood pressure on this one.

 

[Mule]

Be your own Man.!!...stay loyal to your trade, because it will always take care of YOU, reguardless of what EC your working for, or what Inspector is inspecting your work. Further more, People will respect you more in the long run, for sticking with what you believe. Just be diplomatic about it....

 

[William1978]

Exactly, IMO, its an inspectors job to inspect what has BEEN installed, not what should be installed. This was my whole point, I gave the 2' wall example because it was an easy one, but where would the inspector draw the line at the rough?

So what would you say when the inspector hands you a list of defects at the time of a final and most of them could have been taken care of before the sheetrock was hung? Is the inspector suppose to pass a job that doesn't meet code on a rough? I don't think so. Many contractors wire these houses to min. code. I look for what is installed and make sure everything that is required is there also.

 

[220/221]

So what would you say when the inspector hands you a list of defects at the time of a final and most of them could have been taken care of before the sheetrock was hung?

I'd say "CRAP....I should have paid more attention"

If it was a gray area and I had cleared it before the install, I'd fight it.
If it was a gray area and one inspector passed it, I'd fight it.

You are not paying the inspector. He is not working for YOU, he is working for the uneducated consumer, ie the current and future building owner/tennant.

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

If during a rough inspection, an EI missed something, it is ultimately the installers responsibility. Remember, both the EI and the EC both missed it, not just the EI, and... you guys spend much more time on the site than an inspector does. How many times does an inspector go to a site and there is more "debris" and construction material around making it difficult to even make an inspection.

It is not a perfect world, but at the end of a job, during a final inspection the work has to be correct.


The fact that some EIs make it up as they go along...if that is a pattern, they absolutely deserve to be reprimanded/fired. Knowing what I know today, I would not stand for it.

 

[SEO]

When I make an electrical inspection if I find violations on either the rough or final I list violations cited and leave a code reference. Example sw bedroom has over 2' of wallspace between the two closet doors install receptacle outlet section 210.52(A)(2)(1). I always leave a paper trail, everything that I write is public record and can be used in court or taken to the construction board of appeals. And as a contractor any waiver, code interpertation, or violation that I get I would require it in writing as well. People have a tendency to forget things . If it's important enough to make a difference GET IT IN WRITING!

 

[electricmanscott]

It is not a perfect world, but at the end of a job, during a final inspection the work has to be correct.

That pretty much sums it upand it is up to the installer to see that this happens.

 

[acrwc10]

If during a rough inspection, an EI missed something, it is ultimately the installers responsibility. Remember, both the EI and the EC both missed it, not just the EI, and... you guys spend much more time on the site than an inspector does. How many times does an inspector go to a site and there is more "debris" and construction material around making it difficult to even make an inspection.

It is not a perfect world, but at the end of a job, during a final inspection the work has to be correct.


The fact that some EIs make it up as they go along...if that is a pattern, they absolutely deserve to be reprimanded/fired. Knowing what I know today, I would not stand for it.

What do you mean by this? Are you talking about the layout of the outlets ?because so many architects leave out 25% of what is required.

I fully agree it is not up to the inspector to find EVERY violation or short coming on a job, like Pierre points out there is usually a lot of material , sheet rock, garbage, plywood, etc. on the job at the time of rough inspection. It would be nearly impossible to see every thing in the few Minutes they are allotted for an inspection,(and I believe the time allotted for an inspection is way to short).
I am the one on the job for days and weeks not minutes, Thankfully I have a great working relationship with my GC's and there crews because I am always noticing things the framers have missed or done wrong, it is not that I am smarter or better then them it is that I am in every wall, corner, and ceiling of the building, and this gives me the time to notice things like a beam in the first floor ceiling may not line up with the load bearing wall on the second floor it is there to support ( this has happened ) and it is much better I find it ,nicely point it out, and we all have a better job in the end. I feel if there is a problem with the job, be it mine or yours, it is a bad idea to stand back and say "can't see it from my house", because if there is a failure or a law suit from it ALL OF US GET SEWED not just the person who made the mistake. So as such I would rather add an outlet that is not on the plans but needs to be there at rough in then at final. How does it look to the GC if you need to cut open a wall or ceiling that is finished to add what should have been there before cover-up ?

 

[stickboy1375]

So what would you say when the inspector hands you a list of defects at the time of a final and most of them could have been taken care of before the sheetrock was hung? Is the inspector suppose to pass a job that doesn't meet code on a rough? I don't think so. Many contractors wire these houses to min. code. I look for what is installed and make sure everything that is required is there also.

I dont want him to pass a job that does not meet code, but I certainly do not expect him to waste his time looking for things that he can see at the final either.

 

[radiopet]

I had this debate with my boss and his silly comment today. :roll: (of course its tough to have a debate with someone thats never been wrong in his life and makes one miserable employee)


Is it your responsibility on rough inspection to make sure everything is to code before sheetrock is installed ( lets say for example a 2' wall thats missing the required receptacle) or to only check off whats been installed that it meets code.

IMO, its not your job to babysit an EC, but to enforce the code as spelled out in the NEC.

Stick,

Sometimes I just might have to babysit them to get it right. Sometimes things get changed after we leave the inspection ( no...say it ain't so....lol ) and as an inspector it is our job to make sure it is code compliant on our rough in but we do have the potential of missing something ( we are only human...some of us anyway )....in the end it takes two in order to dance.....

So once past the rough in and lets say a 2' walls gets by an inspector, does that mean it is not to be added or called out on the final.....well not to most inspectors I speak with as they would make them add the receptacle that is needed.

We do our best to hold their hand and many are very good and only need "now and then" type of assistance but in the end the inspector wont see it all because of limited time on inspections and pressure from higher ups to get "r" done approach but in the end the EC has to make it right as they get more time to look it over and feel comfortable about it than the inspector has......

Inspectors do their best but some things can be missed for who knows what reason, in the end it is the contractors job to make it compliant as if it is missed on the rough in chances are it will be caught on the final....and wrong still needs to be made right....regardless.

 

[wbalsam1]

In New York State, if a person engages in an activity requiring special skills, education, training, or experience, such as conducting an electrical inspection to observe compliance with the National Electrical Code which is a generally accepted standard referenced by the building code in effect in the jurisdiction, the standard by which his conduct is measured is the conduct of a reasonably skilled, competent, and experienced person who is a qualified member of the group authorized to engage in that activity. In other words, the hypothetical reasonable person is a skilled, competent, and experienced person who engages in the same activity.

Often persons practicing these special skills must be licensed. Architects and private investigators come to mind. Even though, at present, licensing of electrical inspectors is not a statewide requirement, the AHJ within a community is it's building official whom is required to have received training and passed a competentcy test. Anyone who performs these special skills, whether qualified or not, is held to the standards of conduct of those properly qualified to do so, because the public relies on the special expertise of those who engage in such activities. Thus, an unlicensed driver who takes his friends for a joyride is held to the standard of conduct of an experienced, licensed driver.

Normally, the law does not make a special allowance for beginners with regard to special skills, such as an inspector who fails to observe a code infraction. The learner, beginner, or trainee in a special skill is held to the standard of conduct of persons who are reasonably skilled and experienced in the activity. Sometimes the beginner is held to a standard he cannot meet. For example, a first-time driver clearly does not possess the experience and skill of an experienced driver. Although it seems unfair to hold the beginner to the standards of the more experienced person, this standard protects the general public from the risk of a beginner's lack of competence, because the community is usually defenseless to guard against such risks.

The Authority Having Jurisdiction has a duty and an obligation to conduct electrical inspections or assign this to another party and take remedial actions when violations are observed. :smile:

 

[mdshunk]

In New York State, if a person engages in an activity requiring special skills, education, training, or experience, such as conducting an electrical inspection to observe compliance with the National Electrical Code which is a generally accepted standard referenced by the building code in effect in the jurisdiction, the standard by which his conduct is measured is the conduct of a reasonably skilled, competent, and experienced person who is a qualified member of the group authorized to engage in that activity. In other words, the hypothetical reasonable person is a skilled, competent, and experienced person who engages in the same activity.

Often persons practicing these special skills must be licensed. Architects and private investigators come to mind. Even though, at present, licensing of electrical inspectors is not a statewide requirement, the AHJ within a community is it's building official whom is required to have received training and passed a competentcy test. Anyone who performs these special skills, whether qualified or not, is held to the standards of conduct of those properly qualified to do so, because the public relies on the special expertise of those who engage in such activities. Thus, an unlicensed driver who takes his friends for a joyride is held to the standard of conduct of an experienced, licensed driver.

Normally, the law does not make a special allowance for beginners with regard to special skills, such as an inspector who fails to observe a code infraction. The learner, beginner, or trainee in a special skill is held to the standard of conduct of persons who are reasonably skilled and experienced in the activity. Sometimes the beginner is held to a standard he cannot meet. For example, a first-time driver clearly does not possess the experience and skill of an experienced driver. Although it seems unfair to hold the beginner to the standards of the more experienced person, this standard protects the general public from the risk of a beginner's lack of competence, because the community is usually defenseless to guard against such risks.

The Authority Having Jurisdiction has a duty and an obligation to conduct electrical inspections or assign this to another party and take remedial actions when violations are observed. :smile:

You an attorney too? I swear an attorney wrote that.

 

[wbalsam1]

You an attorney too? I swear an attorney wrote that.

Wished I was. (I probably wouldn't be killing myself wiring a 3 story house.) :smile:

 

[kapakahi]

missing at rough-in

missing at rough-in

Rough in inspections are not a requirement of the compliance with the electrical code. Compliance is necessary at final. Whenever I find an issue at rough-in (that is not major) e.g., the example of a missing recetacle in a 24" wall: I tell the electrician and I make a note of it. It is not in violation on rough-in. I will not pass the job at final if the receptacle is missing. When it is missing at rough-in a violation can not be issued since there is no violation when the job is only in progress. Yes, how will I know at final that the cables were stapled properly? How will I know that the box is the right cubic inches? I know my electrician's work well. If they are conscientious (and it will tell from the rest of their work) they appreciate me pointing out the defect and they straighten it out prior to sheetrock and don't play games with me. They know I will not forget and I don't miss anything. I have no qualms about opening a point to make sure someone is not trying to pull a fast one on me. Nevertheless, good communication is essential in accomplishing the goals of proper electrical installations and inspections.