Responsible for bringing wiring to code?

[david]

Assuming that you are not the AHJ, but you work for the AHJ, what is his/her position? The first time someone gets hurt in your jurisdiction and they stumble across this page, there will be plenty of finger pointing. I can't even conceive how an area could have no "code" for electrical installations in the modern world, circa 1950 say. You mean people could do anything they wanted and the local power company would just hook it up?

OK than, our jurisdiction is in western PA. The state had no adopted building code prior to April 2005. The states commercial buildings were enforced under labor and Industry Panic Act which dealt with egress requirements trough a commercial facility. Hospitals had the department of health. Some municipalities adopted property maintenance codes. There were no adopted electrical or building codes throughout the state. the exception would be for the city of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia who adopted building codes earlier on I'm not sure what year.

Outside of those few jurisdictions like the one I live in, what code would you suggest I reference to write up a code violation , perhaps a Boca code addition a 1999 our prior publication, should I turn to the California electrical code(CEC) , a southern building code , or to the Canadians electrical code, you may say if the building was built in 1999 turn to NFPA 70 1999, so I need to know how I establish jurisdiction of the 1999 NEC
I can only establish jurisdiction if the building is declared unsafe or a hazard. Are you suggesting any non compliance to a published building code of that time meets that threshold .

 

[growler]

In that case, if the building was pre-1999 you could reasonably conclude that the NM above the drop ceiling was OK, as long as you're under 3 stories. This is basically the approach that NJ takes in its Rehab code.

I cannot see how a correction order could be written for other reasons of being not code compliant to a code that was published during 1999

David I think the rehab code is ment to be more permissive than a requirement.

Say that during a remodeling project you find NM used in a commercial building above the ceiling grid. Some jurisdictions may be tempted to make you bring this up to code because you have a remodeling permit. Showing that the install was legal in 1999 would allow this NM to stay as is rather than waste a lot of time and money trying to bring it up to the present code.

 

[david]

You mean people could do anything they wanted and the local power company would just hook it up?

No, but lets not mix these two things up. Electrical services where required to be inspected by certified electrical inspectors since 1992
prior to that electrical inspectors where not required to be certified.

But a service being required to be inspected by a certified electrical inspector by some writ through a utility companies regulation's allowed the Utility company the right to refuse service from there utility, unless there regulations where satisfied. And there regulations usually stated latest version of NFPA 70.

A electrical inspector under those circumstances was never established as the authority having jurisdiction. The electrical inspector prior to 2005 was a consultant hired to certify that the installation of the electrical service met or exceeded the utility companies regulations as referenced to NFPA 70

 

[david]

David I think the rehab code is ment to be more permissive than a requirement.

Say that during a remodeling project you find NM used in a commercial building above the ceiling grid. Some jurisdictions may be tempted to make you bring this up to code because you have a remodeling permit. Showing that the install was legal in 1999 would allow this NM to stay as is rather than waste a lot of time and money trying to bring it up to the present code.

I agree we use our Authority to require open splice boxes, wires hanging out, wire nuts missing. ( bare splice ends just hanging there) and other issues to be addressed. Business owners and property owners facing the option of cleaning up that mess or having there building declared unsafe usually op to clean up the mess.

Once a building is declared unsafe there is sure to be an order to vacate following that decision.

However we are not going to declare a building unsafe simply because we find issues that did not comply with a published code at the time we can estimate the installation was done.

 

[growler]

A electrical inspector under those circumstances was never established as the authority having jurisdiction.

In most areas the electrical inspector is not the authority having jurisdiction. The inspector is an employee of the goverment body (city, county, state) that has jurisdiction and the real authority is from an elected official ( to be more precise the office held by a government official).

 

[david]

In most areas the electrical inspector is not the authority having jurisdiction. The inspector is an employee of the goverment body (city, county, state) that has jurisdiction and the real authority is from an elected official ( to be more precise the office held by a government official).

I agree with that

 

[petersonra]

Doing a commercial job at a strip mall yesterday and I ran into some really bad code violations for the panels that control the exterior / parking lot lighting. In a large metal enclosure on the back wall is a 277/480v panel and a 120/208v panel. Numerous wiring violations throughout, exposed bus, etc.

My question is, once I put my hands in there am I responsible to bring this to code? I have brought it to the attention of the property management company telling them someone is going to killed in there one day. This installation is about 40 years old. If I feed a circuit from here or do any work at all with this and something happens will the powers that be come back to me and say I should have known and I should have fixed all of the problems before connecting anything to it?

Thanks.....

IMO, you are only responsible for the work you do. However, the AHJ may not issue a CO until such time as whatever work they think needs to be done is done.

There are some things you would have to be responsible for regardless of existing work. if you add load to a circuit for instance, you are responsible for doing a load calculation to make sure it is not overloaded. IMO, that responsibility goes all the way back to the service point. So you either need to do a new load calculation, or update the existing one if you are adding load.

 

[Strathead]

I agree we use our Authority to require open splice boxes, wires hanging out, wire nuts missing. ( bare splice ends just hanging there) and other issues to be addressed. Business owners and property owners facing the option of cleaning up that mess or having there building declared unsafe usually op to clean up the mess.

Once a building is declared unsafe there is sure to be an order to vacate following that decision.

However we are not going to declare a building unsafe simply because we find issues that did not comply with a published code at the time we can estimate the installation was done.

I don't think any of us are trying to be adversarial. First, who is the authority having jurisdiction in your area? Do you work for that person? It would seem that person needs to establish a firm guideline on this issue. Since as stated above, this is usually an elected official, one would think that they could decide exactly how to deal with this. For example, I don't think it would be unreasonable to at a minimum, pick a code year, say 1976 or even up to 1999 and state that all installations prior to 2005 must conform with the NEC published at that time, prior to 1970 (for example) and any installation between 1970 and 2005 must comply with the 1970 code at a minimum. The thing is that either way this has to be a law, not what we feel is acceptable.

Next, sorry I don't do the multiple quotes well, but in reference to utility company inspection prior to 2005. They couldn't have been arbitrary. They must have used some guideline. I hope I speak for others when I ask out of natural curiosity, how things worked in your area for the last century. I mean, what, other than personal integrity, prevented a person from using Romex or SO cord down the outside of a building, or sticking the guts of a panel in a wooden box open on the wall, or leaving the wire nuts off of a hot splice, failing to proper bond metal equipment, or any of a multitude of other truly hazardous situations with electricity.

 

[Barbqranch]

Take lots of pictures of the existing hazards.

 

[david]

I don't think any of us are trying to be adversarial. First, who is the authority having jurisdiction in your area? Do you work for that person? It would seem that person needs to establish a firm guideline on this issue. Since as stated above, this is usually an elected official, one would think that they could decide exactly how to deal with this. For example, I don't think it would be unreasonable to at a minimum, pick a code year, say 1976 or even up to 1999 and state that all installations prior to 2005 must conform with the NEC published at that time, prior to 1970 (for example) and any installation between 1970 and 2005 must comply with the 1970 code at a minimum. The thing is that either way this has to be a law, not what we feel is acceptable.

Next, sorry I don't do the multiple quotes well, but in reference to utility company inspection prior to 2005. They couldn't have been arbitrary. They must have used some guideline. I hope I speak for others when I ask out of natural curiosity, how things worked in your area for the last century. I mean, what, other than personal integrity, prevented a person from using Romex or SO cord down the outside of a building, or sticking the guts of a panel in a wooden box open on the wall, or leaving the wire nuts off of a hot splice, failing to proper bond metal equipment, or any of a multitude of other truly hazardous situations with electricity.

In short , US currency in the sense that most builders could not bank roll a construction project themselves, those who could weren’t usually willing to tie up their own money in construction projects.

Banks and insurance companies, wanting to protect their board of directors and investors. Banks where the main reason that buildings where required to be certified by an electrical inspector before the contractor could make that final draw. There were lots of homes built the only thing inspected was the electrical service, so the Utilities regulations would be satisfied.

There were a few electrical contractors that called for rough inspections and final inspections because they wanted a certificate certifying that the project was inspected by a third party.

Edit: also keep in mind in this state contractors are not required to be licensed, anyone with a tool belt could be an electrician

 

[david]

I don't think any of us are trying to be adversarial. First, who is the authority having jurisdiction in your area? Do you work for that person? It would seem that person needs to establish a firm guideline on this issue. Since as stated above, this is usually an elected official,

Here its seldom ever an elected official, though in plenty of municipalities it is an municipal employee.

It depends on what municipality I go into to do an inspection. I either work under a building code official established by a particular municipality or my employer and sometimes one of my coworkers is the building code official. I’m certified as a building code official, my career has been mostly electrical so I tend to stay away from the responsibilities of a building code official.

Currently there is legislation that looks to be soon enacted, that will require about 75% of our states municipalities to have at least two and as many as the municipality decides Building Code Officials. So if a property owner or builder disagrees with a Authorities decision a different authority can be hired that is more agreeable with the owner or builder.

But all these municipalities are going to be required to have at least two authorities having jurisdiction that the public can pick from.

Edit

 

[ggunn]

In most areas the electrical inspector is not the authority having jurisdiction. The inspector is an employee of the goverment body (city, county, state) that has jurisdiction and the real authority is from an elected official ( to be more precise the office held by a government official).

Here in Austin, where Austin Energy is a municipally owned entity, the Utility and the AHJ are one and the same. You would think that this would make things easier.

 

[ActionDave]

I probably would refuse, unless my quote already includes the jackhammers. What if you pull the existing wire out (or partially out) and can't pull the new stuff (or the old stuff) back in? Then you're screwed. You'll have to bring the jackhammers out anyway and they didn't agree to pay you for it ahead of time.

Everything went just fine. I'm back home with my feet up.