Special permission stretching the application?

[david]

i am being ask to grant special permission the problem i have is this single family dwelling is large but it was served by a 400 amp service and the load at the dwelling has not changed. the new 1200 amp service is to serve all existing and fuiture buildings on the premiss

 

[david]

Interesting enough I informed the electrician last month that alterations and repairs to an existing electrical system for a single family dwelling and accessory structures was exempt from the Uniform construction code, in essence there is no authority having jurisdiction for the alterations being done at this project. I (we) at most would only be consultants advising the electrician if the installation is compliant with NFPA 70 2008.

Even when the 1200 amp pedestal service (though elaborate ) was inspected the power company was the authority having jurisdiction. Since the state exempted this type of alterations to existing single family dwellings we only acted as a consultant on behalf the power company for the 1200 amp service up-grade.
The power company will not energize a service upgrade without an approval, but they are the actual authority having jurisdiction over service upgrades of this nature.
We informed the electrician at the time of the service inspection that multiple feeders to this dwelling would not comply with the provision of the 2008 NEC. The electrician said they wanted to it right and now are seeking special permission. The problem is # one, I do not see it as compliant and # two we are not the authority having jurisdiction over this alteration. Past the service equipment no one has jurisdiction it is exempt.

 

[petersonra]

if everything downstream of the service equipment is exempt, I don't see there is a violation in the first place. The feeders are downstream of the service point and are thus exempt according to what you are saying.

 

[david]

if everything downstream of the service equipment is exempt, I don't see there is a violation in the first place. The feeders are downstream of the service point and are thus exempt according to what you are saying.

The alterations are exempt from the uniformed construction code and the authority of any building official. However the state still adopted the 2008 electrical code. I?m not sure as contractor if you build a set of steps for someone and do not comply with the states adopted building code you could rest to easy hoping no one stumbles and falls.

It is unclear if a contractor would be expected to comply with a states electrical code even though the project does not require a permit.

Our position on this to the contractor you hired a electrical engineer who submitted documentation indicating if you do as he submitted you will be in compliance with the national electrical code.

The only problem is he stated the authority having jurisdiction would have to give his blessing. There is no authority having jurisdiction for the work in question. We are the authority in the municipality but this is exempt from our jurisdiction. We do not intend to approve the engineers design and we feel it is non compliant to the national electrical code.

The contractor needs to get the engineer to seal his letter, the contractor wants this building department to grant special permission. We are not going to do that.

 

[petersonra]

I misunderstood what you initially said.

Let me paraphrase it.

Somehow the initial installation got approved.

You believe the initial installation was not NEC compliant.

Modifications to the existing installation are not subject to your review.

You had nothing to do with the initial installation.

How is it you are involved at all?

In a previous post you said you are not the AHJ. If that is the case, I would think you have no authority to give "special permission", even if you wanted to.

Special Permission. The written consent of the authority
having jurisdiction.

 

[david]

Ok the dwelling had a 400 amp meter enclosure outside, two 200 amp service rated panels were grouped at one location upon entering the dwelling in a utility room. This was a code compliant installation. At some point an electrical contractor ( not currently involved with the generator and 1200 amp service upgrade) added a third 200 amp service disconnect and service entrance 25 feet in another room away from the. two original grouped service disconnects. This now became a non compliant installation.

Without any prior discussion with us as the electrical inspector for the new 1200 amp service upgrade
A structure was built to mount the new 1200 amp service and gen. 75 feet from the dwelling.

By the utility companies regulations I was called to inspect the new 1200 amp service so it could be energized. I was acting as a consultant on behalf of the utility required by state utility regulations to inspect the upgrade.

The 1200 amp service passed inspection but I noticed three feeders supplying the dwelling from this new location I ask why the multiple feeds to the dwelling and was told we just reefed what was there.

I made the statement that multiple feeds to the dwelling would not be compliant with the NEC.
I made it clear that I had no authority over the rest of the alterations being done past the service. The contractor said he wanted to do it right then ask what was wrong.

I gave him my point of view and he now has an engineer?s view point

Keep in minde if a permit would have been required we would be the athority having jurisdiction

 

[mgookin]

...

It is unclear if a contractor would be expected to comply with a states electrical code even though the project does not require a permit.

...
..

An exemption from a permit requirement is not authority to evade code. Code is code. All work must meet all codes.

 

[david]

An exemption from a permit requirement is not authority to evade code. Code is code. All work must meet all codes.

Except the electrical code was adopted as a reference standard to the uniform construction code and by regulations this type of alteration is exempt from the Uniform construction code

 

[petersonra]

An exemption from a permit requirement is not authority to evade code. Code is code. All work must meet all codes.

If it is exempt from permitting just how would one enforce anything?

To the OP:

Your employer either is or is not the AHJ. If they are not the AHJ they can't give special permission because only the AHJ can do that.

Your employer either has or does not have the authority to inspect the existing work and declare it is compliant or not, and if it is non-compliant require it be brought into compliance.

It should not be real hard to decide the answer to those two issues.

Being what amounts to a consultant to the utility is not relevant.

 

[mgookin]

Except the electrical code was adopted as a reference standard to the uniform construction code and by regulations this type of alteration is exempt from the Uniform construction code

Being exempt from code and being exempt from a permit requirement are two different things.

Buidings and lands preempted by the federal government are not subject to local or state regulations pertaining to code.

Repairs and maintenance under a certain valuation are generally exempted from permit requirements in most jurisdictions.

Here's a good example: Almost nobody requires a permit to run a Cat5 data cable. But if it's in a plenum it needs to be plenum rated. It doesn't get inspected but if someone comes across it or if there's an adverse event and forensics discovers a non-compliance, that installer is on the hook. I had this happen in a county owned building when I worked for the city building department. The competing bidder ratted him out.

Here's another example: Carpet & wallpaper are regulated by code. Ever heard of a wallpaper permit? No! But in a place of assembly it has to comply with ASTM E84 for class A flamespread and smoke development. If the fire marshal comes in on an annual inspection or otherwise and discovers it, he's going to order remediation.

 

[david]

I understand all that 403.1 (b) has general exclusions from the uniform construction code altogether

403.62( c) has exclusions from the permit process as you can see along with other exclusions if your excluded from the code altogether your excluded from the permit process along with other exclusions from needing a permit

<<<<<The electrician who said he wanted to do this right has to decide what that is>>>>>

TITLE 34. Labor and Industry
PART XIV. UNIFORM CONSTRUCTION CODE
GENERALLY
? 403.1. Scope.
(a) Application.
(1) The Uniform Construction Code applies to the construction, alteration, repair, movement, equipment, removal, demolition, location, maintenance, occupancy or change of occupancy of every building or structure which occurs on or after April 9, 2004, and all existing structures that are not legally occupied.

(b) The Uniform Construction Code does not apply to:

(8) Alterations to residential buildings which do not make structural changes or changes to means of egress, except as required by ordinances in effect under sections 303(b)(1) or 503 of the act (35 P. S. ? ? 7210.303(b)(1) and 7210.503). Under this subsection, a structural change does not include a minor framing change needed to replace existing windows ordoors.
(9) Repairs to residential buildings, except as required by ordinances in effect under sections 303(b)(1) and 503 of the act.
? 403.62. Permit requirements and exemptions.
(c) A permit is not required for the exceptions listed in ? 403.1(b) (relating to scope) and the following, if the work does not violate a law or ordinance: