IBC 2006 1704.1   Where application is made for construction as described in this section, the owner or the registered design professional in responsible charge acting as the owner’s agent shall employ one or more special inspectors to provide inspections during construction on the types of work listed under Section 1704. The special inspector shall be a qualified person who shall demonstrate competence, to the satisfaction of the building official, for inspection of the particular type of construction or operation requiring special inspection. These inspections are in addition to the inspections specified in Section 109.

Code commentary edition indicates:  "The permit applicant is responsible for hiring the special inspector and must incur all associated costs.   According to Section 105.1, the permit applicant may be the Owner, or the authorized agent in conection with the project ( see Section 1.5.1 for further details."

I see many governmental clients pushing this off on the Construction Manager and even General Contractor as they don't want to deal with the hassle or budget the costs separately.  

The way I read this provision, that is not permitted - anybody else have any thoughts?

I have yet to see any design professional who want to hire the inspectors either - certainly not within their standard fees.

I think this depends a lot on the jurisdiction---how big, how sophisticated, what has been the norm.

When I worked in the Seattle area as a structural engineer (UBC days---multiple jurisdictions), the jurisdiction would sometimes require the Structural Engineer of Record to pick the special inspector. The code language was pretty similar. The jurisdiction would have lists of approved firms that had certified inspectors. I'd chose one at random since I never had a clue about the different firms and never saw the inspection reports.

When I moved to a rural area, we no longer got special inspections. There just weren't any inspectors. When the area eventually got certified inspectors, it was left to the contractor to arrange for the special inspection. The EOR just pasted the requirements from the code on his spec sheet.

I'd think a large developer would have the resources to hire their own special inspection service. This really shouldn't be left to the contractor because that's not really a healthy way to arrange things. The special inspector should owe their allegiance to the owner, not to the contractor. In reality, the only time I've seen it work that way is on a highway bridge project.

DK Engineering PLLC
dkengineer.com

 Posted by Code Archie

IBC 2006 1704.1   Where application is made for construction as described in this section, the owner or the registered design professional in responsible charge acting as the owner’s agent shall employ one or more special inspectors to provide inspections during construction on the types of work listed under Section 1704. The special inspector shall be a qualified person who shall demonstrate competence, to the satisfaction of the building official, for inspection of the particular type of construction or operation requiring special inspection. These inspections are in addition to the inspections specified in Section 109.

Code commentary edition indicates:  "The permit applicant is responsible for hiring the special inspector and must incur all associated costs.   According to Section 105.1, the permit applicant may be the Owner, or the authorized agent in conection with the project ( see Section 1.5.1 for further details."

I see many governmental clients pushing this off on the Construction Manager and even General Contractor as they don't want to deal with the hassle or budget the costs separately.  

The way I read this provision, that is not permitted - anybody else have any thoughts?

I have yet to see any design professional who want to hire the inspectors either - certainly not within their standard fees.

 

What I see is the AHJ requiring a statement of special inspections from the applicant that lists what insoections are required, who will provide them, and whether they are continuous or periodic.  The forms in this area require Owner, design professionals, and special inspection agency signatures.  

The Washington Association of Building Officials maintain a list of approved agencies and registered inspectors.

http://www.wabo.org/special-inspection

 Posted by Dennis Keierleber

I'd think a large developer would have the resources to hire their own special inspection service. This really shouldn't be left to the contractor because that's not really a healthy way to arrange things. The special inspector should owe their allegiance to the owner, not to the contractor. In reality, the only time I've seen it work that way is on a highway bridge project.

I agree - The special inspector should owe their allegiance to the owner, not to the contractor.  Thus I'd say the Owner should be the one hiring - they pay either way since the contractor passes it on. 

That's why some states (i.e. NY by education law) restrict design build since the architect works for the builder and it could cloud his duty to the public.  Though prohibited, it still takes place.... 

http://www.op.nysed.gov/prof/arch/archguide-b1.htm

An entity not authorized to provide architectural services, such as a general contractor, cannot subcontract with, or employ, an architect in order to provide architectural services to a third party client, except in accordance with Regent Rules 29.3(b)2.

I wonder how the 2009 IBC change for the design and inspection of both temporary and permanent bracing for long-span trusses (60 ft. plus) will be handled?  Here's a link to an article that draws attention to the importance of the code change to construction and building safety:

http://www.kenilworth.com/publications/cs/de/201105/files/54.html

I will any comments here or by e-mail: fwoeste@vt.edu

Frank Woeste, P.E.

Professor Emeritus, Virginia Tech University, Blacksburg

Frank Woeste, Ph.D., P.E.
Professor Emeritus