Changing code cycles

[ryan_618]

A question for the inspectors here:

What is your comfort level in allowing a practice that is illegal in your current adpoted code that you know perfectly well will be legal in the next code cycle?

For example, the 96 to the 99 version of dedicated electrical space. Remember how the dedicated space was 25 feet!!! So, you are inspecting under the 96 code, and your state will be adopting the 99 in say, 1 year. There are ducts and things 15 feet above a panel, and leak protection has been provided. You know that in one year this is not going to be a violation...but it is today. What do you do? Do you require the duct to be moved?


BTW: This is just a theoretical question...it has nothing to do with anything specific.

 

[websparky]

Re: Changing code cycles

Hi Ryan,

In your example, I don't think I would require the old code when you know the new code will override it in time. For items like the one you have given, the safety and intent will still be satsified.

That said, each AHJ needs to make a decision such as this based on his overall knowledge of the code, especially when the jurisdiction is a few code cycles behind.

 

[bphgravity]

Re: Changing code cycles

I feel it would have to be on a per inspection basis, meaning not encompassing all changes. I think it is reasonable to permit a current violation if the next cycle "relaxes" the current code to that particular circumstance.

However, I don't think it would be fair to require a more stringent code before it is actually required by the adoption of the new code.

I had an inspector start requesting "in-use" covers a month before Florida adopted the 2002 NEC. Plus, all jobs permitted before the adoption date were "grandfathered" in. I know of a few builders that permitted dozens of jobs just to get out of some of the code changes. Some homes were being built up to year after the adoption of the 2002 but were permitted under the 99. :roll: Florida adopts the electrical code and all other building codes at the same time. In some cases, as it was a few years ago, the changes could mean $2,000 of additional costs per one home.

 

[ryan_618]

Re: Changing code cycles

I would agree Bryan. I don't think it would be right to require something that is not adopte yet.

So, would you use "special permission" to allow these items to pass?

 

[charlie b]

Re: Changing code cycles

I think this is why there is an ?A? word in ?AHJ.? It is also why I am glad that, at least in my area, a person can?t be hired as an Inspector without showing previous experience as a journeyman electrician. The knowledge and experience that an Inspector brings to the table is what makes it possible to discern what is, and is not, safe.

 

[pierre]

Re: Changing code cycles

Ryan
That is a very interesting question, especially since the code cycle is upon us.

The 'special permission' question is one that puts the inspector in the hot seat and I believe today is used less and less as it requires a signature.
To answer your question, I agree with Bryan and the others that it requires an inspection by inspection determination to be able to apply it.
Something like the inuse covers is interesting and I will not step on any toes to answer that.

My thoughts are.
1. As an inspector don't try to 'muscle' the electricians, staying within the code(s) is not always easy and requires 'teaching' as well as enforcing.
2. Talk to other inspectors and the men in the field to get a 'feel' for this very complex industry (no one knows it all) . Networking for info such as in this and other forums is the best way to try and settle a problem inspection. Working without asking questions is a thing of the past.

Pierre