# Do you think this past an inspection?



## RJJ (Sep 11, 2010)

What is missing?


----------



## jar546 (Sep 11, 2010)

It probably PASSED an inspection somewhere along the line before you got there.  Thank goodness for spray foam


----------



## north star (Sep 11, 2010)

*#  #  #*

RJJ asked:



> *What is missing?*


Maybe a pipe sleeve / relieving arch for the pipe passing through the footing.*#  #  #*


----------



## Uncle Bob (Sep 11, 2010)

Should have been a Two-way clean out.

Uncle Bob


----------



## RJJ (Sep 11, 2010)

Yes! I told them when the test was on that a sleeve or arch was needed to be installed. I told them at plan review. I told them at the time I issued the permit. I told them I would return and to check. They back filled both sides and concreted over. Told me it was in place. I told them to dig it up! They asked why? I said I need to see it. Good thing they used foam! I said if you can produce an ES report for the foam I would say ok! They finally decide to put a sleeve in. Gota love the job. Cost them 225.00 in re inspection fees.

Think they may put a sleeve in next time!


----------



## RJJ (Sep 11, 2010)

I don't like street "T". There is a clean out inside the building 6' up stream and one off a y about 4' in the other direction.


----------



## peach (Sep 12, 2010)

wouldn't think so... you have a couple of reasons why...  (mine would be the relieving arch)


----------



## Glennman CBO (Sep 13, 2010)

Per UPC, the 3034 PVC (as it appears to be) would not be allowed, due to being within 2 ft of the building. The cleanout, fittings serving the cleanout, and pipe extending through the foundation would be required to be piping approved for use inside a building (sch 40).

The cleanout would only need to be 2 way if there is not a cleanout inside the building. Otherwise, the "tee" needs to be approved drainage fitting (combo y or sweep).

The hole in the wall? Well, comments above say it all.


----------

