Technical Assistants to the Building Official

[Debra McMahon]

Question:

Do you consider permit technicians technical assistants to the building official per section 105.2 of the Virginia Construction Code?

Please elaborate in your response.

[Sean P. Farrell]

In my humble opinion, I DO consider Permit Technicians as Technical Assistants to the Building Official. Please see definition of Technical Assistant in chapter 2 of the VCC. Per the definition…Permit Technicians are “persons employed by a local building department or enforcement agency for enforcing the USBC…”.

Sean P. Farrell

[Richard Grace]

 
<p class=”MsoNormal” style=”margin: 0in 0in 0pt;”><span style=”color: #000000;”><span style=”font-family: Calibri;”>Sean, I was waiting for a rebut on your post, but after waiting a week and not seeing one, I thought I would provide one 🙂 The definition in Chapter 2 would appear to include permit technicians, however Section 105.2.1 (Qualifications) requires all technical assistants to have at least three years of experience (<b><u>and</u></b> general knowledge) in either building construction, inspections, MEP trades, or fire protection, elevator, or property maintenance work. Most permit techs I know don’t have this kind of experience, nor will they receive it in the position that they are in, so they would not qualify as technical assistants. Personally, I would consider them such, but code language requires that they have construction experience, inspection experience, MEP experience, or experience in work associated with fire protection, elevators, or property maintenance. </span></span></p>
 

[Sean P. Farrell]

Richard, no debate with regards to your testimony, but read the next sentence…”Any combination of education and experience that would confer equivalent knowledge and ability shall be deemed to satisfy this requirement.” Therefore, if the Permit Technician can demonstrate understanding in terms of facts, information, and conceptual process acquired through experience / education or the theoretical understanding of a subject (knowledge) in a similar field; as well as skill sets necessary to carry out the practical application (ability) of similar duties, then they have met the equivalency requirement and therefore can and should be considered Technical Assistants in accordance with 105.2.1.; which is in tune with the definition. In my opinion, one must draw intent here, and my reading of the intent is demonstrated competence in the field or something equivalent. If you feel the language needs some adjustment, I am Chairing the Administrative Ad-Hoc Committee and we can work with the Permit Tech Committee to propose the necessary adjustments to satisfy your concerns. Let me know.

 

 

 

 

Sean P. Farrell

[emory rodgers]

In the law and regulations the narrower interpretation is technical assistants were enforcers that being code officials, plan reviewers and inspectors and not the front office staff that took in plans, took inspections, ran office operations, filed, triage complaints and steered permit applicants and citizens through the process including checking for licenses required by state agencies and local government. In the early days this support staff was called clerks and administrative assistants. In the early 80’s some urban and larger jurisdictions changed the front office staff to “permit technicians” and even had different grade levels. Some local building departments started having designated permit technicians doing entry level plan reviews such as 1&2 family projects fences, or a bathroom, recreational room or even decks where the applicant used the plans from the locality. During this time permit technicians and some building officials requested DHCD/JPVBCA to offer more permit tech training and a voluntary certification program, but one not mandated. No consensus, from VBCOA for mandating permit tech’s to be certified or what that might entail, or that they were technical assistants, has been conveyed into regulations for the VCS/USBC/SFPC. So, I suggest VBCOA and the permit tech’s propose code changes, and concurrently, ask DHCD to have BCAAC consider the matter. Emory

[Author]

Posts