Remote Video Inspections - PDF Free Download

2017 NFPA Conference & Expo PRESENTED BY: NFPA BCDC Remote Video Inspections 1

Remote Video Inspections PREPARED BY: JIM MUIR AND NFPA BUILDING CODE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE (BCDC) 2

2017 NFPA Conference & Expo CEUs: To receive CEUs for this session, scan your badge at the back of the room before leaving Evaluation: Complete a session evaluation on the mobile app. (Search app store for NFPA 2017 C&E. ) Handouts: Handouts will be available via the mobile app and at nfpa.org/conference Recordings: Audio recordings of all sessions will be available free of charge via NFPA Xchange. 3

Why consider Video Inspections? Efficiencies for staff are important. Being able to get an inspection taken care of by leveraging technology instead of the travel, coordination, routing, etc. that would follow a normal inspection process. Efficiencies for customers might be more important. Depending on the scope and limitations of a program, customers who need just an item or two on a reinspection could save a day in their project schedule, time and costs it might take to be at or make the site accessible, allow for scheduling or maintaining the subsequent sub trade schedule for instance. 4

Why consider Video Inspections? 2 Homeowners might be able to continue over an evening or weekend and maybe even avoid taking time off work to be available for and inspection Finally, the goodwill that may be gained with your local government officials, the local building trades organizations, and the general public might be the most over arching reason for offering efficient and innovative services. 5

Remote Video Inspections This is a collaborative effort of the members of the BCDC (Building Code Development Committee) of the NFPA. Jim Muir Chief Building Official Clark County Washington Matt Bailey Building Official City of Lowell Arkansas Rick Breezee Building Official Metropolitan Airport Commission Minneapolis, MN Sal DiCristina Construction Code Official Rutgers University New Brunswick, NJ Mark Joiner Administrator Louisiana Uniform Construction Code Council Robert Kelly Manager Department of Permitting Montgomery County, MD Menard Kopczynski Building Official Keene, NH Jon Laux Building Official Twin Falls, ID Jim Sayers Commercial Plans Examiner Clackamas County Oregon Steve Stokes Chief Building Official Amador County California Brian Wert Building Official Village of Baldwin, Wisconsin Jerry Wooldridge Manager Building Safety Reedy Creek Improvement District Lake Buena Vista, FL Raymond Bizal P.E. SW Regional Director, NFPA 6

Remote Video Inspections Guidelines for Effective Use We were tasked with the development of a White Paper. For the NFPA world. Copy of the White Paper is available. Presenters: Jim Muir, Bob Kelly, Brian Wert, Jim Sayers, and Rick Breezee 7

Remote Video Inspections Intro Remote Video Inspections is one name for the process, but could be more accurately described as video chat inspections. This type of inspection is essentially like any other inspection, just that the inspector is not on site, but rather directs on-site personnel to show them needed views and determine if they are able to approve. The jurisdiction and the customer must be equipped with a field device capable of using a video chat program. 8

Remote Video Inspections Intro 2 Two of the most common formats/programs available are Skype and Apple Face Time, but any program accessible by both parties would work. The jurisdiction determines what programs they wish to support. The parameters of the program should be defined for customers and staff. 9

Remote Video Inspection Considerations A jurisdiction may need or wish to create a policy Define the types of inspections that qualify Efficiency for the inspector and the customer must be balanced. 10

Remote Video Inspection Considerations 2 How is a request made for these inspections (appointment, inspector discretion, etc.) Clear definition of the authority and latitude of the inspector related to determining the suitability of the inspection. 11

Considerations cont d Documenting the inspection as any other inspection, to special notation that is was done using video, all the way to requiring a copy be archived It is not anticipated that offering video inspections opens doors for photos or recordings substituting for inspections 12

Considerations cont d Training staff for consistency is important so that the lines of what is acceptable are not blurred. As much as making a list for what is allowed is important, making it clear what is not allowed might be more important to avoid creep. It is recommended that the more clarity that can be included in the process the better chance for success. 13

Limitations There must be a reliable connection. There must be good enough light to clearly view the work. 14

Limitations 2 There must be reasonable access to provide unobstructed views. At any time and for any reasonable concern, the inspector determines if video inspection is suitable. 15

The Future Drone inspections are a reality and really are just another form of remote video inspections. Robotic inspections have been used in many fields and could easily be imagined in building safety for those areas that are less accessible. Time travel not yet a reality. 16

QUESTIONS and DISCUSSION?? 17

Guidelines for Remote Video Inspections Abstract Remote Video Inspections (RVI) offers both the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) and the permit holder the ability to leverage technology to increase efficiency during the inspection process. This has the potential to benefit both, but it comes with some limitations and risks. The limitations will likely dictate when a RVI will be utilized. The risks, which have a direct impact on the efficiency gained, will be assumed. With proper attention and communication, both parties will have a successful inspection. It is important for jurisdictions that are allowing the use of RVIs to develop rules, policies and procedures in order to provide reasonable expectations to the permit holder and the public. Transparency in procedures will go a long way towards the success of these inspection programs. These guidelines for conducting RVI have been developed by the Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) to assist authorities having jurisdiction in the use and conduct of remote video inspections. Authors The content, opinions and conclusions contained in this report are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the NFPA. NFPA makes no guaranty or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of any information published herein. Development of these Guidelines for Remote Video Inspections took place as an activity of the Building Code Development Committee (BCDC). Members of the BCDC identified the need for the report and worked collaboratively with peers to develop a draft through a Task Group. The Task Group then forwarded the draft to the entire committee for further refinement and acceptance. This paper was voted on by the full committee and was accepted at their meeting held November xx, 20xx by a majority vote. Building Code Development Committee 1

(* denotes RVI Task Group member) Jim Muir, Chair* Chief Building Official Building Safety Clark County, Washington Matt Bailey Building Official Construction Services City of Lowell, Arkansas Rick Breezee Building Official Metropolitan Airports Commission Minneapolis, Minnesota Sal DiCristina, Co-Chair Construction Code Official Rutgers University New Brunswick, New Jersey Mark Joiner Administrator Louisiana Uniform Construction Code Council Baton Rouge, Louisiana Robert Kelly* Manager Department of Permitting Services Montgomery County, Maryland Medard Kopczynski, CBO City Manager City of Keene, New Hampshire Introduction Jon Laux Senior Inspector/Plans Examiner Building Department Twin Falls, Idaho Jim Sayers* Commercial Plans Examiner Building Codes Division Clackamas County, Oregon Steve Stokes Chief Building Official Building Department Amador County, California Brian Wert President Brian Wert Inspection Agency Hudson, Wisconsin Jerry Wooldridge* Manager, Building and Safety Reedy Creek Improvement District Lake Buena Vista, Florida NFPA Staff Liaison: Raymond B. Bizal, P.E. Southwest Regional Director National Fire Protection Association Huntington Beach, California 2

These guidelines for conducting remote video inspections have been developed by the Building Code Development Committee (BCDC) of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) to assist authorities having jurisdiction in the use and conduct of remote video inspections (RVI). Technologies today offer tools that may be utilized to increase the efficiency of inspection programs. Interest in the use of RVI by AHJ s for construction inspection compliance has prompted this evaluation. While building inspection programs were primarily considered during the development of these guidelines, they could also apply to fire prevention, property maintenance and other types of inspections. RVI programs should benefit the jurisdictions that are using them with savings in travel-time, use of vehicles, and other aspects of inspections. These programs should also benefit the permit holder (and those representing the permit owner) primarily with more timely inspections. This will allow for a quicker resolve to problems and more flexibility to the construction schedule. Thus, inspection programs should be more effective and efficient for both sides of the counter. A RVI can be considered a physical inspection for all intents and purposes, and as such scheduling, coordinating, documenting and processing can mirror the regular inspection process. The more that the RVI mirrors a traditional inspection, the more it will be accepted. Due to the benefits to both the inspection agency and the permit holder, it is anticipated that RVIs will occur more frequently and become the norm for certain types of inspections. With that in mind, these guidelines offer thoughts and direction for those ready to take advantage of RVI programs. Administrative Issues Jurisdictions have the same authority to conduct video inspections, as they would for in-person inspections. For those jurisdictions conducting RVIs, policies should be in place outlining the rules regarding these types of inspections. This may include a summary of how to schedule a RVI and the types of inspections that are allowed. Determination for whether to allow an RVI should be on a case-by-case basis. It certainly is discretionary, but should not be discriminatory. 3

The accepted format of RVI should be established; this includes programs such as Skype and Facetime. These remote inspections should be conducted live. Live inspections allow the authority having jurisdiction to direct the inspection. Also, live inspections allow for discussion about construction methods and compliance issues. Prerecorded inspections do not allow for the inspector to direct the inspection, which could hinder confirmation of compliance. If the RVI involves the use of Unmanned Arial Vehicles (UAV), such as drones, the UAV operator must understand and comply with all the regulations that apply to operating such a vehicle. At times inspectors may take and keep photos for the record. It is up to the jurisdiction to decide how much information is needed to be maintained in the inspection record, however each state and jurisdiction has rules defining what a public record is and the method and time frame for retention. There are a number of video streaming services currently available. The most common are Skype and Facetime, but any web-based meeting services could be used. Also, there may be specialized features in permit management software that could be employed. Voice communication can be via the video software or telephone. Requests for Remote Video Inspections Video inspection should be able to be requested by the permit holder or their designee. The decision by the AHJ on whether to allow a RVI must be based on policies established by the jurisdictions. Not all types of inspections will be appropriate for RVIs, so it should be understood that the AHJ will determine on a case-by-case basis if an RVI will be allowed. Thus, the AHJ has the authority to approve the use of a RVI, determining whether it is appropriate or not. Conversely, the AHJ may also suggest the use of a RVI. The permit holder has the ability to opt for an on-site inspection. As with any inspection request, the permit holder must contact the jurisdiction for an inspection appointment. The jurisdiction may make available a list of predetermined types of inspections that are allowed or not allowed for RVI. A list of inspections not allowed will likely curb the number of RVI requests that will likely not be approved. 4

Scheduled inspections are efficient for both parties, but may not be necessary. An inspector could allow requests for RVI during their day, specifically on work that they inspected earlier and for which corrections are easily evaluated by video. Inspection Fees There does not appear to be any reason to change traditional inspection fees. Most jurisdictions have fee structures that incorporate plan reviews, external agency s fees, and most include the inspection cost in the permit fee. The AHJ may want to establish a special fee for video inspections as they determine necessary. Though there may be efficiencies by reduced transportation and travel time, the jurisdiction is still providing the inspection service. This includes providing the certifications, training, expertise and professional development needed for the inspectors in addition to a review of the video and any storage requirements for the video. The jurisdiction may also have staff on location to operate the cameras for a certified inspector that is off location. RVIs also require the same administrative support for scheduling and maintaining records of completion of the inspection, as well as maintenance of the local code requirements and other administrative services that accompany such inspections. If the jurisdiction s inspection fees are based on the cost of providing services, then it is incumbent on the jurisdiction to evaluate the impact of providing RVI services on the budget. Fee schedules could be adjusted accordingly. Remote Video Inspection Process The camera must be operated at the direction of the inspector. The inspector must have the ability to communicate directly with the camera or UAV operator to perform a thorough inspection. This will ensure that all aspects of the work are observed to the satisfaction of the inspector. The remote inspector might need verification of the dimensions of the work being inspected. This can easily be done by the camera operator or another person on-site with a tape measure or known dimensional object. 5

The person who performed the work being inspected should be available to answer questions regarding the work. State and local requirements should be followed as if in-person inspections are being conducted. The only difference with a RVI is that the inspector is viewing and conducting the inspection remotely. Inspectors must be qualified based on state or local requirements in order to conduct different types of remote inspections. Types of RVI The types of inspections that would be appropriate or inappropriate for a RVI must be considered by the AHJ on a case-by-case basis. However, experienced inspectors may be able to generally determine them in advance. For example, framing and plumbing rough-in inspections would not be appropriate for RVI because of the complexity and extensive amount of inspection needed. But many reinspections may be appropriate to address the items corrected. Water heater installations would usually be appropriate for a RVI. Jurisdictions my find it useful to develop lists for types of inspections that generally are or are not appropriate for RVIs. Verification of Inspection Location Many job sites can be very similar. Particularly in a residential subdivision where multiple homes are being built. This makes it important to be certain that the RVI is taking place at the proper location. One way to properly verify the correct location is to start the RVI on the exterior of the building. This could mean starting at the nearest intersection and moving down the street to the correct lot. This can be verified by the inspector utilizing the site plan and subdivision plan. For example, if the location is the third lot from the corner, then the inspector can follow as the permit holder walks down the street, stopping in front of the proper lot. 6

If the building is provided with an address, showing the address marking may be sufficient, but that is up to the inspector to decide. Geolocation from a mapping tool may also be used for site verification, as long as the verification is conducted on a live video stream. Location on Property Verification In addition to verifying the proper lot or building, it is also important to verify the proper location of the inspection within the building or property. For example, if a certain type of hardware is used in multiple locations within a building and only one location is needing inspection, the location of the RVI is important and should be verified. This can be done by starting the inspection at an identifiable location within the building and following it to the proper location. It is easy to see that properly identifying the location is the responsibility of both the permit holder and the remote inspector. Correction notices that speak to specific locations are as important as the permit holder showing clearly the location in the video. Inspectors can also use lumber crayons to mark locations in a manner that they will recognize their mark during a RVI. Plans and Specifications Prior to the scheduled inspection time, it is necessary, in many cases, for both the permit holder and the inspector to have the approved plans and associated documents available for access during the inspection. Questions may arise during the inspection that, as does during traditional inspections, requires referring to the approved documents. This is an important step in the inspection process, where an inspector opens up the plans upon arrival at the job site to verify things like dimension, spacing, number of items, etc. After all, the inspection is being performed to verify the construction has met the approved plans. During a RVI, this can be even more important due to the partial disconnect by performing the inspection remotely. Limitations 7

As with any inspection, the remote inspector maintains the right to request that the conditions for the inspection be reasonable. During a RVI, both parties must be satisfied with connectivity, lighting, pixel quality, access or other conditions. If the remote inspection is not conducive to a reliable inspection, it may need to be rescheduled or abandoned in favor of an on-site inspection. The RVI may also be called off due to the quality of the work and the number of corrections being identified. Inspection Sign-Off The sign-off process generally does not have an on-site component; the process may be electronically available, or a jurisdiction could offer to issue other documentation in the form of email, fax, mail or delivery to site at next inspection. Documentation would otherwise follow the usual process and detail of an on-site inspection. Maintaining Records A recording of the remote video inspection is required. Jurisdictions must decide whether to maintain a copy of the video used in the RVI based on open records laws. There is no precedence to maintain the recording of the video file. As with a traditional inspections, there is no reason to photograph the approved work since the inspection record of completion should suffice. But there may be cases when the AHJ wants to maintain photos or videos. Verification of an inspection is by endorsement by the inspector that an inspection has been completed satisfactorily. Conversely, if an inspection item is not satisfactory, then further action will be identified and transmitted to the permit holder for correction. Use of Unmanned Arial Vehicles (UAV) 8

The use of UAV certainly have advantages for challenging inspection site due to size, terrain, height, etc. The same considerations would apply to RVI conducted with a camera mounted on a UAV, as with a hand-held camera. Other local, state and federal rules may apply. For the operation of UAV, Federal Aviation Administration rule must be followed. Such rules may dictate who can operate the vehicle, how high the vehicle may fly, and how close to buildings the vehicle is allowed to approach. For more information, see the paper SMART Fire Fighting: The Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the Fire Service released at NFPA s 2015 Responder Forum. For the most up-to-date regulations, see rules promulgated by the Federal Aviation Administration. Conclusion RVI allows both jurisdictions and permit holders to leverage technology to increase efficiency of the inspection process. This has the potential to benefit both, but comes with some limitations and risks. The limitations will likely dictate when a RVI will be utilized. The risks, which have a direct impact on the efficiency gained, will be assumed. Even if a RVI is called off for any number of reasons, it was probably worth the risk. With proper attention and communication, both parties will have a successful inspection. It is important for jurisdictions that are allowing the use of remote video inspections to develop rules, policies and procedures in order to provide expectations to the permit holder. The transparency in procedures for the AHJ will go a long way in the success of these inspection programs. 9