I have an odd request from a building inspector in MA. I did a small pizza resturaunt in Hudson MA and they did not have an stamped set of electrical drawings, I had a layout for equipment and lights and thats how it got done. I had my final inspection no problems.
The building inspector is wanting me to fill out an affidavit stating my work was done to code. He said it's required by 780CMR section 107.6.3 of the building code.
Anyu concerns in doing this? He will not sign the building card for the owner until i do this.

I was under the impression that an inspector was supposed to INSPECT the finished job and tell you if it is up to code or not! Guess I have been doing it wrong all this time.

Plans I have seen always had an initialed box with the code cycle that they were compliant with and appropriate boiler plate language. I suppose that is what the guy is looking for.

The main time it is important is if the code changed from approval until final. Most places only require compliance to the code cycle permitted.

I don't want to hold the job up but I am hesitant to sign it having never had to do it in my career it seems odd.

Approved plans (by Twp after Plan Review) must be on the jobsite at all times when inspections are being performed.

As Greg said, there is a stamp placed on the plans that the various disciplines (Elec/Plum/Bldg/Fire) initial & date upon Plan Review for code compliance.

Approved plans not being on site for reference by any of the inspectors results in 'no inspection being performed' (Red Tag)

It sounds like the cart got put before the horse here.

What work did you do? What was inspected? What was the permit for?

It seems reasonable that there be, somewhere, some paperwork that answers these questions.

No 'stamped' plans? No problem. Along with the EC license comes your authority to make your own sketches and sign off on them. These are usually included when you apply for the permit.

You can also include 'cut sheets,' information regarding specific appliances and their loads.

I would just write him a letter saying that "to the best of my knowledge <the project> was built compliant to the 20xx code" and sign it.

That is implied by your being the contractor of record on the permit anyway so I do not see any additional legal issue.

Greg,


We sometimes have EC's do that when there is a completed basement that never had any inspections done at all. We tell the EC to go through the basement and do a NON Destructive search of all the wiring. Look for connectors, proper wiring, etc. and then write a short letter stating that FROM What I see doing the non destructive search, every thing looks like it meets the latest NEC. This way it kind of protects them and us from future problems.

JoeyD:
Rereading your OP, I misunderstood your issue.

Our building inspectors would not ask an EC for anything, that is the responsibility of the electrical inspectors. If anything, my inspector (elec) may ask for a copy of your layout, or I may call you for the layout before I approve the permit for release.

Be that as it may, either way, your install would be inspected for code compliance. The permit app. would be referenced for quantities and items installed.

The only plans on the job were basic layout, walls, rooms and the little structure work that needed to be done and it was stamped.
My inspection went smooth enough, I brought him in there before I started walked the whole job talked layout, code issue's and that was it. He inspected it when i was done no problem.
This came up a couple weeks after my inspection when the building inspector was doing his final.

He (the AHJ) is just looking for a replacement for unstamped prints otherwise known as a P.E. stamp. This is the stamp architects put on prints.

It sounds like the AHJ is looking for someone to blame if it turns out that there is any non-compliant work whatsoever found at any point in the future, whether it was work that you did or work that was done 20 years ago by a homeowner.
I would avoid signing anything that exceeds the work that I did...you could be opening yourself up to a world of future trouble.

It's some liability issue that apparently over my head

I can make e-mailable prints all day long, but the state would not sanction them, insisting i 'ought to know what i'm doing'

Yet they'll look for a set of architect's prints with a stamp on it before a job starts for their 'okey dokey'

But the truth is, most archy's don't even make a site visit, and are summarily dismissed after the initial set of prints go through the state process

The site sparky makes all the changes, which can be worlds apart from the original architecuals , we know them as 'as builts'

In my case, the state doesn't care about as builts, or the evolution that may have occured

So my Q is, is the state empowered to ask for an Archy level as built when the archy's been history for 90% of the job?

~S~

~s~:
Hello stranger!!
Here in the Garden State, the AHJs (Bldg/Plumb/Elec/Fire/CO/etc) can and do ask for signed/sealed 'as-builts' either from the Architect of record, or the PE/EE/ME/SE etc. Legality for the request is based on regs within the NJ UCC (5:23 et al)

Chapter & verse will have to wait, as my Blue Book is in the office.

With the OP; I still can't see what a building inspector would want a letter from an EC??

Hi Hotone ,

I'm unsure of the OP's situation, but it's made me wonder about mine. I had complained to my AHJ that the Archy had been dismissed after his plans were stamped by the state.

I'm told that this is routine, but it doesn't make sense unless the job runs close to the original prints

In my case,the job had major changes

Nobody's asking, but I guess i'll have to look up the regs here, if we have any such reg....?

~S~

~s~:
Usually a letter from a 'new' Arch suffices that the job is 'taken over'. The legalities of anything else is left to the lawyer groups.

Basically, it is treated like a Change of Contractor.

Thanks HotOne

i guess if a new Arch comes along i can throw my asbuilts at him/her

....and i usually hide under my bed at the mention of lawyers....

~S~

Sparky;

If the lawyers are around, you might want to resist any urges to tear off the "do not remove under penalty of law" tag from the mattress when you're under there.

I am thinking it may be related to the question of liability for the building code issues.
Here in Canada the building inspectors often rely on a system of schedules from the engineers and architect but they do not come from the electrical contractor, they come from a professional. I don't know about the US Building code but many performance requirments for electrical systems are defined in the building code. Things like how a fire alarm operates, where the devices must be installed. Emergency lighting is not defined in the CEC for location only how they are to be supplied and operate. Things like smoke control, sprinklers, elevator operation relative to how they work when a fire is in the building, exiting and a lot of other things that have electrical equipment that must operate in specific manner relative to the building code.
In Canada an electrical contractor that is not an engineer would never be asked to provide any such declaration as without a professional's seal it has no legal weight here. I think that BI was looking for such an assurance from the electrical designer but in the acbsence of an electrical engineer maybe an architect should provide that piece of paper. I doubt that the EC would know all the answers a BI is looking for>