Re: Why is the Code so big?
The reason it?s so big is that, despite 90.1(C), many proposals are still trying to make the NEC a design manual and too many of them are accepted. I have yet to meet a plan checker or inspector (even the good ones) who fully understands how to properly evaluate electrical area classification beyond the simplest figures or how to recognize proper relay coordination.
I have chronic sinusitis. I?ve had it since my early 20?s, so I have lots of ?experience.? I know what medicines I need and when to take them. I know when over-the-counter medicine and rest is enough. I know when I need prescription antibiotics. Since I know I?m allergic to penicillin, I also know I need a different broad-spectrum antibiotic. I know a lot of things about it - but I still can?t write a prescription. I usually have to go through two licensed professionals, a physician and a pharmacist.
About 30 years ago, a pharmacist questioned one of my prescriptions and called the doctor about it. To this day, I have no idea what the question was, or even if the prescription was changed, but I do know the pharmacist distributed what the physician ultimately prescribed. The pharmacist may still have questioned the doctor?s judgment; I don?t know. For whatever reason, the pharmacist apparently felt a professional responsibility to question the prescription but his own liability was limited to the distribution of the legally prescribed medicine whether it was correct in his opinion or not.
I have yet to see a US domestic law, statute or code that gives ?governmental? AHJs the power to enforce that doesn?t also absolve them from personal and corporate liability.
The City of Los Angeles? municipal building code is a typical example:
SEC. 92.0139. NON-RESPONSIBILITY OF CITY. Neither the City of Los Angeles, nor any department, board, commission, officer or employee thereof shall be held liable or responsible for any damage or injury caused by or resulting from the issuance of any permit, or any inspection or approval made under the provisions of this Code.
Most inspectors (actually all but one) that I?ve dealt with over the years have been competent - some exceptionally so. However, the current CBO I?m dealing with is now batting ?0 for 10?. He tried to enforce Art 324 (we?re using the 1996 NEC on this project) on a cable tray installation yesterday. He?s been grasping and straws for several months now. A month ago he forced our contractor to replace a compliant temporary branch circuit with a non-compliant one. I must admit it wasn?t that serious, but you should have seen his performance when we made him write a 90.4 ?special permission? waiver for the installation - he didn?t even want to appear responsible for his decision ? but he couldn?t admit he was wrong either.
The problem is that, even if someone did get hurt, the CBO has no personal liability ? but as a PE and the owner?s rep I still do. When I was reminded my empoyer gave me a letter of indemnity, I said I knew they would pay for my defense and pay any fines but would they guarantee I?d still have a license and do jail time for me, if necessary.
I prefer the European inspection model where Code inspection is more a ?Safety Quality Control.? The inspector, ?inspects? and informs those with liability of what the inspector believes is safety non-conformance, but enforcement and correction is left to the judgment of those who will hold risk and liability in the final installation. The ?owner, operator, designer, installer, insurer, etc.? All of the ?stake-holders? have to accept the installation.
?But who is responsible for the unsuspecting and untrained public?? (I didn?t even know to ask if there might be something wrong with the prescription.) That?s why our inspector colleagues are still essential - especially for residential work and areas with public access. I don?t know what the pharmacist spotted; but, since I?m still here, I assume that the ultimate resolution worked. Nevertheless, it was the physician who made the final call.
The problem on my side of the table is that today too many PEs are ?stamps for hire? that don?t realize or care what their safety responsibilities are. The only reason for licensing PEs (or Doctors) in the first place is for safety, especially for the public. There are ?Dr. Feelgoods? out there too. But at least Doctors and PEs are personally legally responsible for their work ? including incompetence.
[ October 01, 2004, 05:10 PM: Message edited by: rbalex ]
