CONSISTENCY: TOPICS FOR CODE OFFICIALS AND OUR PARTNERS

1. CONSISTENCY:TOPICS FOR CODE OFFICIALS AND OUR PARTNERS Customer Brown Bag Luncheon November 6th, 2017

2. Meet Your Code Administrators • Jeff Vernon • Building CA • 37 years in construction industry • Level III certificates in all 5 trades • MCP & CBO • Tommy Rowland • Mechanical and Plumbing CA • 22 years in the industry • Level III certificates in BEMP • Licensed BEM contractor • Gary Mullis • Electrical CA • 45 years in the industry, 28 years with Mecklenburg County • Have held contractor license for BEMP • CEO certificates for E and B

3. Consistency • Consistent building code enforcement is accomplished through the combined efforts of our customers, the plan review and field inspection staff. Each plays an important role in assuring that structures are built in compliance with the State and local laws. • It is very important that the enforcement is administered in a fair, thorough, and consistent manner. • The purpose of our consistency policy is to ensure all code officials “SPEAK WITH ONE VOICE” while partnering with our customers to provide a safe and economically viable community.

4. Interpretations • “Gray areas” are code questions encountered by experienced code officials and customers. To ensure consistency across time and projects, once these issues are addressed, staff create a formal or informal interpretation. • Interpretation issues can be caused by new products that may not be code compliant, missing or non-compliant information on the approved drawings, or by inconsistent code application between office and field code officials or customers. • Mecklenburg County Code Administrators (CA’s) are responsible for interpreting N.C. Building Codes. Questions and appeals go to the CA’s only after the issue cannot be resolved by the staff and code officials working on the project. Customers may appeal decisions to them as needed after pursuing relief through the plan review or inspections management teams.

5. Consult the Department’s Consistency Policy • Attend Consistency Team meetings, or read the minutes and our CA Quarterly newsletter • Utilize the Review and Inspections Management Teams assigned to each project or permit Three ways OUR CUSTOMERS CAN AVOID CONSISTENCY ISSUES BEFORE THEY HAPPEN

6. Commercial Plan Review Team – TOM SMITH, manager 980 314 3108, Michael Peterson 980.314.3186, Errol Cooper 980.314.3178 CTAC/RTAC – Charles Walker, manager 980.314.3107, Scott Westbrook 980.314.3114 HCD Team – HOWARD GRINDSTAFF, manager 980.314.3171, Clay Goodman 980.314.3174 Mega Team – ANDY HERRING, manager 980.722.9259, David Rains 704.309.4510, Eric Moore 980.314.3357

7. Residential Team - JEFF GRIFFIN, manager 704.634.8847, Mike Kale 980.521.6757, Brandon Burgin 980.259.9200, David Barrett 980.722.0259 Commercial Team – STEVE PEARSON, manager 980.314.3062, Bob Hartman 980.722.3618, Andy DeMaury 704.200.5595, Allen Croom 980 297 5839

8. Building Consistency Meetings • We strongly encourage attendance at all consistency meetings, if possible. Minutes are also made available online and a CA newsletter is issued via e-mail quarterly. • The Commercial Building Consistency meeting is held on the first Tuesday of each month. • The Residential Building Consistency meeting is held on the first Wednesday of each month. • In each meeting, the consistency portion of the meeting runs from 8-10 a.m. • Also, in each meeting we conduct a monthly training session from 10 a.m. – noon.

9. Building Consistency Meetings • Questions and topics are solicited from customers and inspectors. • Questions or topics can be submitted through email jeff.vernon@mecklenburgcountync.gov • The web address for the Commercial Building Code page is https://www.mecknc.gov/LUESA/CodeEnforcement/Inspections/trades/building/Pages/Commercial-Building.aspx • Residential Building Code page is https://www.mecknc.gov/LUESA/CodeEnforcement/Inspections/trades/building/Pages/Residential-Building.aspx

10. Mechanical & Plumbing Consistency Meetings • We strongly encourage attendance at all consistency meetings, if possible. Minutes are also made available online and a CA newsletter is issued via e-mail quarterly. • Mechanical meetings are the last Tuesday of each month, 8-10 a.m. • Plumbing meetings are the last Wednesday of each month, 8-10 a.m. • Questions or topics can be submitted through e-mail: tommy.rowland@mecklenburgcountync.gov. • The web address for mechanical/plumbing page is https://www.mecknc.gov/LUESA/CodeEnforcement/Inspections/trades/Mechanical-Plumbing/Pages/default.aspx

11. Electrical Consistency Meetings • We continually seek industry participation in our consistency meetings. Most are a 2 hour Q and A session or a topical training session. Minutes are also made available online and a CA newsletter is issued via e-mail each quarter. • Electrical meetings are held the second Wednesday of each month from 8:00-10:00 a.m. The March, June, September and November meetings have a special focus on customer-generated questions and issues. Contractor continuing education credits are issued for these sessions. Two hour training sessions follow most meetings. Per the State A&E Boards all our classes qualify for CE with them. • Training Sessions; We just finished two 8 hour sessions of 2017 Code Changes presentations and will continue with 2 hour sessions of the same. • Questions or topics can be submitted through e-mail: gary.mullis@mecklenburgcountync.gov • The web address for electrical page is https://www.mecknc.gov/LUESA/CodeEnforcement/Links/Pages/Consistency.aspxpx

12. Our Code Enforcement website is www.meckpermit.com From this location, you can go to Helpful Links and then to Consistency to see policies, meeting reminders, meeting minutes, interpretations, and reports. For more information from the CAs, go to Trades and then to each trade individually for specific information.

13. Consistency Policy – ISSUE IN PLAN REVIEW PRE-PLAN APPROVAL: Since plans examiners are at the front of the code enforcement process, the following steps are taken to reduce the number of occurrences where a disagreement in interpretation might arise between plan examiners and field inspectors: • Plans Examiner identifies “gray area” interpretation issue on the design drawings. • Plans Examiner discusses issue with plan review peers and/or supervisor. • Plans Examiner sends an e-mail message with the subject line “Interpretation Issue” to the CA, with a copy to the assigned Inspector if different than the Examiner. The message shall include the following minimum information: • Project Name • Project Number • Project Address • Project Description

14. 5. Code Section 6. Gray Area/Interpretation Issue described in detail. • Inspector will contact Plans Examiner ASAP if he or she wants to participate in the discussion. • CA meets with Plans Examiner and provides a written answer/interpretation to the gray area/interpretation issue. • Plans Examiner adds CA’s written answer to the project file (Note added to plans or PDF sent to file) for future reference. • Permit is issued with notes referencing CA’s documented interpretation. • CA’s written interpretation is shared with ALL code officials at next consistency team meeting.

15. (process in house is automated in the Outrider/Winchester System and customers may appeal to team management through their dashboard) Note: RTAP category 1 is considered the same as “minor issues.” Issues identified by the field inspector (improper door swing, dimension errors, 1 or 2 missing dampers, missing exit sign, etc.) requiring minor corrections to the approved project design and not requiring a formal “Revision to Approved Plan” (RTAP) submittal, are addressed by taking the following steps: Inspector e-mails the inspections team Project Manager (PM)/Inspector Supervisor (IS) describing the issue, and as needed, discusses the issue. Upon validation of concern with inspection team management, e-mail is forwarded on to office team PM, as an FYI. Inspector brings issue to the attention of the owner’s team and informs them of the need to obtain remedial direction from the Project Designer. Consistency Policy – ISSUE IN CONSTRUCTION

16. If the designer’s solution is relatively simple, it can be approved by the field inspector. The inspector adds inspection notes to the project file with a description of the corrective action to be taken. If the solution requires a documented change to the designer's sealed project design, the change can be in the form of a sealed bulletin drawing as long as it impacts only a single trade and shall be uploaded to the project records by the contractor through his online account. Once changes/corrections are executed by the contractor, inspector inspects for conformance to the new design. If there seems to be a trend of a particular code item, it should be brought up with in the consistency team meeting discussion.

17. Major Issues Notes: RTAP category 2 is considered the same as “major issues.” The following does not directly apply to the HCD Team and Mega Team, when working collaboratively with the owner’s team on their projects. Both units do plan review within their team structure and strive to have them inspected by the same personnel. The Team PM will consult with CAs as needed. Issues identified that appear to the inspector to represent larger or more complicated issues that are likely to require re-submittal of plans (RTAP), involve controversy and/or impact other areas of the “Approved Design Drawings” shall be handled as follows: • Inspector approves any areas of work found to be compliant and informs the owner’s team of the need to get office clarification regarding a question on the remaining portion. • Inspector contacts the inspections team PM/IS and discusses the issue. • Inspector sends an e-mail message with the subject line “Interpretation Issue” to the plan review PM and Plan Examiner and a copy to the inspection team PM/IS. The message shall include the following minimum information: • Project Name/Number • Permit Number

18. 3. Project Address 4. Project Description 5. Code Section Interpretation Issue (Gray Area) described in detail. • Plan Examiner calls or emails the Inspector to meet and/or discuss. • If no agreement, the plan review PM and the inspection PM are added to the discussion. • If no agreement, the CA is added to the discussion. • If no agreement, Director of Code Enforcement participates as final step, again with all parties. • If the final decision changes the original interpretation and/or results in a need to revise the “approved design drawings,” the Plan Examiner shall deliver the written message to the owner's project designer (including a copy of any documented CA’s interpretation), outlining the required change. A copy shall be sent to the project file, the plan review PM, the inspection PM, and the Inspector. • If no plan change is required, the inspector will notify the customer of the final decision.

19. An inspection by the Fire Marshal’s Office identified an egress issue with door hardware that had been passed by the Building Inspector and had been approved by the Building Plans Examiner. When we learned of the discrepancies, we organized a meeting that included the Plan Review and Inspections managers as well as the Fire Marshal’s Office and the Building Code Administrator. Once we discussed the issue amongst ourselves and came to a unified approach based on code logic and departmental processes, we set up a meeting with the designer and the owner’s rep to discuss the issues across the board and to deliver one, consolidated, concise message. In the meeting, we reached resolution with the designer and owner’s rep which gave us a common plan of action to achieve code compliance without placing blame or putting anyone at odds with one another. Hangup on Hardware - A Case Study

20. APPEALS • Appeals start with the inspector or plans examiner, then the team senior examiner or senior inspector for code interpretation issues. The next level is the team manager, then the discipline CA. • The CAs are happy to talk with our customers about issues before a formal process is started. Please send any appeal via email attachment to the appropriate CA. The information should include the following; your name, date, company name, company address, phone number, email, project name, permit number, project address, code type and code section, date of inspection, the code requirement, the specific reason in detail for the appeal.

21. After the Department Code Administrator the next level of appeal is to the Department Director. • After the Department Director, the next level of appeal is to the Engineering Section of the Department of Insurance (DOI). This appeal must be received by DOI, within 10 days of receiving the Director's written response to the owner's second level of appeal. • After the Engineering Section of the Department of Insurance, the next level of appeal is to the Building Code Council's Hearing Committee. This appeal must be received within 30 days of the date of the decision by DOI. • After the Building Code Council's Hearing Committee, the next level of appeal is to the full Building Code Council. This appeal must be filed within 30 days of the BCC Hearing Committee's action. • Decisions of the N. C. Building Code Council may be appealed to Superior Court in either Wake County or the County in which the proposed building is situated. Note: further details on the appeal process at the State Agency and Commission level are available by consulting the 2012 NC Administrative Code and Policies, Chapter 1; section 103: Appeals. This should be consulted as state appeal submission requirements are very detailed.

22. Q & A

23. Thank you for partnering with us to build a safe and thriving community! Jeff Vernon, Building Code Administrator Tommy Rowland, Mechanical/Plumbing Code Administrator Gary Mullis, Electrical Code Administrator