Inspection Dispute: Pressure Test Failure and Enforcement
A rough-in inspection fails because a 3-inch building drain held 10 feet of head for 15 minutes and lost pressure at the test plug. The contractor argues that the leak is at the plug, not the pipe, and that the code allows a 10-foot head test for 15 minutes, so the test was passed. The inspector observed the gauge drop from 10 feet to 8.5 feet in the first 5 minutes and then hold. The contractor has already covered two sections of the drain with concrete and wants the inspector to approve the covered work based on the earlier passed test on a different section. The permit has one inspection remaining before the certificate of occupancy deadline, and the contractor asks the inspector to sign off and note the leak as a punch-list item.
1. Was the test passed? Explain the reasoning the inspector should document.
Read the worked answer
The test was not passed, and the inspector's documentation should say why in testable terms.
- The gauge drop is the finding. A drop from 10 feet to 8.5 feet in the first 5 minutes is a loss of 1.5 feet of head, which is not attributable to temperature or gauge error and is not a stable test. A passing test holds the required head for the required duration with no loss. The fact that it then held does not cure the initial loss; it suggests the leak sealed itself (debris, soil, or a partially seated plug) rather than that the system is tight.
- The plug argument is not a defense. If the leak is at the test plug, the test is invalid and must be re-run with a proper plug; the contractor cannot claim a pass on a test whose boundary failed. Either way, the result is a re-test, not an approval.
- The code minimum is a floor, not a ceiling. A 10-foot head for 15 minutes may be the minimum; the inspector may require a higher head or longer duration where the code or local policy allows, and the test must be on the section being inspected.
- Prior tests do not transfer. A test on a different section does not cover the covered sections.
2. The contractor asks for sign-off with the leak on a punch list. How should the inspector respond, and what are the enforcement options?
Read the worked answer
The inspector should refuse the sign-off and document the refusal. Approving work that has not passed a required test is not a discretionary punch-list item; it is an approval of nonconforming work, and it exposes the inspector and the jurisdiction to liability if the drain fails after occupancy.
The correct sequence:
- Re-test the failed section with a proper plug and a gauge, witnessed, with the result recorded.
- Expose covered work as needed to test the sections that were concealed. The contractor concealed work before inspection; the code allows the inspector to require exposure, and the cost is the contractor's.
- Issue a correction notice citing the specific code section for the test and for concealment before inspection, with a re-inspection date.
- Do not issue the certificate of occupancy until the test passes; the deadline is not a basis for approval.
- Escalation options if the contractor proceeds: stop-work order for the covered work, revocation or suspension of the permit, and referral for enforcement. The inspector should also document the contractor's request in writing, because it shows the contractor was on notice.
The judgment being tested is that the inspector's authority is to verify, not to negotiate; a punch list is for cosmetic or minor items, not for a failed pressure test on a building drain.