This House Met Code.

[jtedesco1]

Originally Posted by jbushart

I wonder if either of them realize to what extent they have gone to prove our original point.

They just don't get it.

They? I always recommended GFCI's, I am on the UL committee that covers them.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by Mike Whitt

North Carolina is ranked up close to the top in its electrical program.

Please provide the association who is doing this "ranking" you refer to.

In the interim:

Former county electrical inspector Michael Ray Richardson of Nakina, North Carolina has pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of conflict of interest and repaid the county $1,160 after an investigation by the state’s Department of Insurance (DOI) accused him of defrauding the public.

Richardson was not arrested on any type warrant, but appeared with his attorney in District Court and agreed to a charge produced by the district attorney’s staff.

Richardson was placed on unsupervised probation for 12 months and a court review of his case is scheduled for April 27, according to records.

A misdemeanor statement of charges shows that Richardson admitted that he, on April 5, 2005, “ … unlawfully and willfully while an employee of Columbus County and employed as a building inspector engage(d) in work inconsistent with his duties or with the interest of the county by performing inspections for the county while having a financial or business interest in the project to be inspected.”

The fact that Richardson pocketed fees for electrical inspections made in the towns of Tabor City, Brunswick and Fair Bluff – money that should have been turned in to the county – was not a part of the court statement.

Assistant District Attorney Sarah Garner said Richardson repaid the county fees for 16 inspections he conducted during 2005. The conflict of interest charge was in reference to the approval of an electrical inspection done by Richardson on his own building project.

The plea bargain came after District Attorney Rex Gore announced on Sept. 29, 2005 that neither his office nor the State Bureau of Investigation – following a probe by the SBI -- would pursue charges of embezzlement by Richardson lodged by former Columbus County Manager Billy Joe Farmer.

34 jobs questioned

The Department of Insurance, however, announced in early October 2005 – two weeks after the district attorney announced there would be no charges – that Richardson pocketed fees for 34 inspections in Tabor City, Brunswick and Fair Bluff.

A question concerning Richardson’s inspection license is still up in the air. Kristin Runger, spokeswoman for the Department of Insurance, said Friday that a hearing in the matter is still scheduled, but no firm date has been set.

Richardson faces the loss of his license for one to five years.

The DOI report noted that records showed “that on Oct. 12, 2004, Richardson was employed as a full-time (Columbus County) employee at an annual rate of $35,276.04 per year with the understanding that he would turn in municipal fees from the towns …”

Richardson, the DOI report showed, did not start remitting fees to the county until April 27, 2005. Farmer, claiming several violations, fired Richardson and the DOI probe supported Farmer’s findings. County commissioners did not renew Farmer’s contract in July 2005.

There was a parallel charge by former county manager Farmer that Commissioners David Dutton, Sammie Jacobs and Lynwood Norris threatened to fire Farmer if he did not drop an administrative investigation into Richardson’s activities, and should be charged with obstruction of justice.

DA Gore announced in his September 2005 release that there was no evidence of the obstruction of justice charge by Farmer. This situation was not addressed in the DOI report.

County employee

The DOI probe noted “Columbus County Inspections Department records include at least 25 (Town of) Tabor City inspection certificates from Oct. 12, 2004 to April 7, 2005; (Town of) Brunswick inspection certificates from Jan. 19, 2005 to Feb. 17, 2005 totaled 8, and there was one inspection certificate for (Town of) Fair Bluff dated Dec. 22, 2004.

“All certificates were signed by Mike Richardson. All inspections were conducted after Richardson became a full time Columbus County employee. No fees were turned into the county for these inspections,” the DOI report shows.

One particular electrical inspection case was Tabor City’s welcome center, which was approved by Richardson on June 30, 2005, one day after being turned down by Kyle Duncan, another county inspector.

The report noted the county’s chief building inspector Kenny Davis on July 5, 2005 found “loose wiring hanging from the ceiling, new wiring with no switches, exposed old wiring, incomplete circuitry, additional fixtures including ceiling grids, lighting and base plugs needed for building function, and doors and windows not installed.”

The DOI report, written by Suzanne Taylor, came after an on-site investigation and interviews with appropriate people last October, nearly three months after Richardson had been fired.

“All I did was approve temporary service so the licensed contractor could make this change over. Any old wires photographed and the mention of doors being opened were all done after the building met code on June 15,” Richardson responded to the state.

“Obviously, during this modification process some windows, doors, old duct work or old wiring would have to be addressed,” the inspector said in a Sept. 12, 2005 letter to DOI’s Taylor.

Explains his project

Richardson’s response to inspection of his own electrical work and building project included, “Mitchell (Stephens), interim chief building inspector for Columbus County, knew full well that I would be doing the electrical, plumbing and carpentry work associated with this job, because I told him so.

“Mitchell told me that for what I was doing, the permit fee would be a total of $150, which seemed to be in line with what we would charge projects of a similar scale anywhere else in Columbus County,” Richardson’s statement continued.

Richardson wrote himself an electrical permit and inspection certificate on April 5, 2005 and inspected his own work and failed to pay the county for the permit, according to county records.

“The secretary in the office filled out the permit and checked ‘building’ and not ‘plumbing’ or ‘electrical.’ I am somewhat dismayed that I am being accused of stealing money when I did not calculate the fee or fill out any forms. I paid what I was required to pay, and there was no theft at all,” Richardson’s statement noted.

Then County Manager Farmer charged Richardson with embezzlement because his report showed agreements between Tabor City, Brunswick and Fair Bluff became effective Jan. 1, 2005, and was signed by Sammie Jacobs, chairman of the county commissioners.

The agreement stated Richardson was to “collect and deposit into the county’s bank account all fees associated with electrical inspections.”

Dates in question

Richardson said he was hired at the rate of $28,000 a year and was told to keep municipal inspection fees. However, county records show Richardson was employed full time on Oct. 12, 2004 at the rate of $35,276.04 per year with the understanding he would turn in municipal fees from the three towns in question, the DOI report showed.

It was during the Oct. 12, 2004 and April 7, 2005 period that Richardson made the 34 inspections in question and kept the fees, but Richardson was a full-time employee of the county, the state report said.

Richardson’s action made him guilty of a felony, the DOI report stated.

[James H. Bushart]

Shock Waves
Pool electrocution is rare... but it's deadly.

By Rin-rin Yu

October 2004

he living room is empty except for several vases of flowers and two large portraits of a young, dark-haired woman with a radiant smile. A few dozen folding chairs lean in neat rows against the wall. This is where the memorial service was held for 21-year-old Natalie Garcia.

What was to be a birthday gathering for Natalie’s brother last summer turned into a tragedy for the Arleta, Calif., family. The Garcias had just remodeled their pool and Natalie and her brother, Byron, decided to go for a dip before the party guests arrived. While swimming in the deep end, Natalie touched the newly replaced underwater light and suddenly went limp. As Byron tried to help her, he felt shocks go through his body.


Another brother, Fernando, raced across the yard, but he was too late. “She was already gone,” says Fernando, looking toward the pool, drained now and cordoned off with yellow caution tape. The cause of the incident was still under investigation at press time.

Natalie’s accident was extremely rare, but risks are still present, experts say. From 1990 through 2003, a total of 60 people died due to electrocutions in swimming pools, according to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Another 50 injuries were reported. The numbers may be low, but pool electrocution is completely preventable, and should never happen at all.



The Statistics Following are the causes of electrical deaths in the United States associated with pools in the years 1990-2002:

28

Plugged-in radios or stereos, extension cords or power tools

13

Underwater pool lights

10

Pool pumps

9

Sump pumps, pool vacuums or pressure washers

Source: U.S. CPSC

Older pools
Every pool built is subject to the National Electric Code. This is a written standard that, if followed correctly, ensures safety from electrical hazard. The code first addressed pools in 1962 and has been amended several times.

Pools built before the NEC account for the greatest risk of injury because many of them have not been brought up to code. “There are hundreds of thousands of potential deaths because older pools are in those conditions,” says George Anchales, former chief electrical inspector for the San Bernardino County Building and Safety Division in San Bernardino, Calif.


Anchales has been pushing the issue of pool electrocution ever since a man in his town became a victim in the late 1980s.



But many aging public pools are facing tighter budgets as they compete with newer facilities, leaving maintenance and upkeep by the wayside, according to the American Red Cross. “There’s nothing wrong with older pools as long as you keep them up and you’re aware of what needs to be replaced and when,” says Greg Stockton, national preparedness expert with the American Red Cross in Washington, D.C.


But when those fixes don’t happen, swimmers can be left vulnerable. For example, one potential hazard lies in lights that were installed before 1965. Old lights are considered dangerous because of possible current leakage. When a light burns out, the bulb is changed but the lens cover, or gasket, is not always properly tightened. This may result in water exposure and further corrosion of the ground wire. The current NEC requires all lights to be encapsulated with an epoxy potting material, to keep water out and seal in the current.


Another problem is that many older pools haven’t been retrofitted with ground fault circuit interrupters. GFCIs cut off electricity when they sense a change in current flow. In pools, the GFCI also senses when current is escaping to the ground through the water. In 1975, the NEC required all pools and underwater light fixtures running at more than 15 volts to be fitted with GFCIs.

A third issue is the way flush deck junction boxes were constructed. Until 1971, flush deck junction boxes were placed close to the edge of the pool without a potting compound and mixed with 120/240-volt wiring for other systems within the same box. They would sometimes fill with water and corrode the wires.

Upon the amended NEC in 1971, only appliances with 15 or fewer volts are allowed in flush deck junction boxes. The boxes need to be placed in an epoxy-material potting compound to protect the wires, and be located at least 4 feet from the poolside, Anchales says. The now-separate 120/240-volt receptacles are required to be at least 20 feet from the pool, according to the 1984 amended version of the NEC.


The NEC requires that every new pool must adhere to the standard, but there is no such requirement for pools built before the code was written. Today, many older pools have been updated to meet the NEC, but there are still plenty out there that have not.


Making it law

In August 1997, Yasmin Paleso’o was splashing in the pool of her apartment complex in Daly City, Calif., when electricity began surging through the 13-year-old’s body. Five other girls playing in the pool started screaming as the electrical shocks began to sting them.


The other girls were pulled out in time, but Yasmin did not survive. Further investigations uncovered faulty wiring and no updated circuit breakers — two easily remedied problems that could have saved her life. In 1998, the teenager’s death spurred a state legislative measure requiring that all commercial pools, including apartment complexes, be retrofitted to meet the NEC. The bill became known as the Yasmin Paleso’o Memorial Swimming Pool Safety Law.


Anchales was a major advocate for the California bill, which mandated commercial pools be retrofitted, but not residential pools. Until Jasmine’s death, even apartments were not included. The original proposal stated that residential pools be retrofitted when a property went into escrow — a requirement that was shot down by the real estate lobby.



“No one wants to try to sell a house with a big flier saying there’s a pool that can kill you,” Anchales explains.


Don Burns adds that the real estate lobby argues such a law is unenforceable. “Who’s going to inspect it? Who’s going to make sure it’s right?” asks the CEO/president of the California Spa & Pool Industry Education Council (better known as SPEC), a lobbying group for the California pool industry based in Sacramento. “It’s a political reality: You can’t put a cop in everybody’s backyard.”


Today, in some cities and states, a pool is required to be retrofitted if a home undergoes a certain amount of renovation. For example, in North Carolina, a pool must be brought up to code when at least 50 percent of the structure is being reconstructed.


“With almost all older pools, there would be some issue that probably needs to be addressed from a safety or health standpoint,” says James Matthews, president of Carolina Aquatech Pools, a builder in Sanford, N.C.


At the very least, builders and electricians should recommend to homeowners that they update older pools, experts say. “If a builder does a remodel and doesn’t [create a safer pool], he is responsible in the event of an accident,” says Rick Legnon, president of Advanced Pools, a builder in Rancho Cordova, Calif. “Any time a property is sold, the pool should also be brought up to code.”

Other factors

Many installations built before the NEC have not been retrofitted, and this remains a real issue in pool electrocution. But there are other reasons the problem exists as well. Following are four factors that contribute to pool electrocution, and what industry members can do to protect themselves and their customers:

• Inexperienced service technicians

A number of electrocution incidents result from work done by nonlicensed, nonelectricians, according to industry experts. “A lot of pool service techs with no background in electricity are doing repairs and shouldn’t be,” says Alison Osinski, Ph.D., owner of Aquatic Consulting Services in San Diego.



Michael D. Manley, for one, doesn’t allow his service technicians to handle electrical matters. “We always tell our employees if they think there’s a problem and they see exposed wires, let the electrician handle it,” says the owner of Champagne Aquatech Pools & Spas in Sanford, Fla., and a Pool & Spa News Top Builder. “I don’t want my service techs to mess with that.”

• Choice of materials



Electric companies warn people to avoid using long-handled leaf skimmers or shepherd’s rescue hooks made of metal or wood. These tools can become conductors if they come in contact with overhead power lines. Instead, use fiberglass tools. The Red Cross and CPSC also recommend wearing dry, rubber-soled shoes when handling equipment.



• Electrical items falling into water

The most commonly heard warning is to never use a hair dryer while in the bathtub. The same principle applies to appliances used near pools and hot tubs. Stereos, televisions, telephones, electric cleaning and repair equipment, and strings of lights falling into pools and hot tubs are among the electrical devices that have caused electrocution injuries and deaths.



“How many times do I see [someone] in the pool, hanging onto the ladder with one hand and reaching out to adjust the boombox volume with the other?” Osinski says. “They’re becoming the ground and it just doesn’t occur to them what they’re doing.”


Pool builders should remind customers that electrical items need to be plugged with an outdoor, not indoor, extension cord. They also should be kept at least 10 feet from the pool.

• Placement near power lines

A smaller issue, but enough to warrant warnings from power companies, is the need to install pools at least 25 feet away from overhead lines. Osinski says despite these recommendations, she’s seen pools placed “awfully close” to high-tension wires, which can serve as grounding spots for stray currents.

“Just because a lot of people haven’t died doesn’t mean it’s not a disaster or problem,” says Stockton of the American Red Cross.


“At a minimum, people need to be aware that these shock hazards are present, and what they need to do to avoid them,” he adds.


For more information on how to prevent pool electrocutions, visit the CPSC’s Web site at www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/5039.html.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by jtedesco1

They? I always recommended GFCI's, I am on the UL committee that covers them.

Sorry, Joe. I must have missed your rebuttal to Mike's insistence that the electrician has a duty to provide "the rest of the story" to the (first he said) the seller, (then, later he said) to the seller who asks for it, (then, later he said) to the real estate salesman who challenges the home inspector's recommendation.

[Joe Farsetta]

Like Mike says:

"My amplifier goes all the way to number 11..."

[James H. Bushart]

I'm still waiting for the identification of this mysterious "rating system" that ranks North Carolina above the rest of the states in the quality of electrical inspectors.

[rwand1]

If inspectors were sworn to uphold the "law", they would be accountable for their actions or lack thereof. Unfortunately, they are not. Which deflates your entire bogus commentary.

Bogus?

I have read court cases where building inspectors and the municipality were found to be negligent because they did not enforce the bylaws or building codes. They are public authorities set up to ensure public safety. So it appears that they are liable either in tort law or criminal liability should their negligence in performance of their duty fall short.

Maybe I am misinterpreting what you meant by your quoted caption above Joe?

[Joe Farsetta]

Many times here n the States, the building department, municipality, electrical inspector, etc are not liable nor held accountable.

We've all heard of the building inspector who looks the other way, or the building inspector who's nterpretation of a particular code reg is way out there and ridiculously narrow, causing hardship for the homeowner or contractor. Often, they do this simply because they can, and get away with it, without reprimand or reprisal.

Many times, as to sub-standard inspection sigh-offs, the excuse is they are overworked and underpaid.

Mike Whitt claims that are held accountable. His argument is disingenuine.

[rwand1]

Joe, with all due respect I am finding it hard to swallow given the litigiousness nature state side that someone in authority is not liable for negligence if harm or financial loss as a result of that negligence.

[Blaine Wiley]

Originally Posted by rwand1

Joe, with all due respect I am finding it hard to swallow given the litigiousness nature state side that someone in authority is not liable for negligence if harm or financial loss as a result of that negligence.

Raymond, we have a saying here in the U.S. "You can't sue city hall".

It is very difficult to sue an employee of the government, which is who the local/city/county code inspectors work for. The AHJ's responsibility is to ensure that the contractor is working to local/city/county standards and is therefore not working for the buyer. He answers to the building office, period.

[rwand1]

Wow! Thats amazing!

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by bwiley

Raymond, we have a saying here in the U.S. "You can't sue city hall".

It is very difficult to sue an employee of the government, which is who the local/city/county code inspectors work for. The AHJ's responsibility is to ensure that the contractor is working to local/city/county standards and is therefore not working for the buyer. He answers to the building office, period.

....and again....I reiterate my point that these people should limit their communications to the builders and contractors. When they step away from that realm and enter ours....contradicting our findings that are based on the family needs for safety with their personal interpretations of old code books...they provide no service to anyone. While they may have very good intentions, there is a tremendous potential for harm.

When a contractor asks him "Do I have to .....?" he answers with the code book for both he and the contractor are accountable to it. Not so the home dweller.

[Mike Whitt]

Originally Posted by jbushart

I'm still waiting for the identification of this mysterious "rating system" that ranks North Carolina above the rest of the states in the quality of electrical inspectors.

Well if you are going to quote someone or relate to a quote of someone at least try to stay close to what they say. I do believe I said NC was rated close to the top or is one of the top.

Attached is a spread sheet done by Mike Holt that shows the rating by state and some of the requirements of some of the states.

[rwand1]

Hey Canada got an A+.