TITLE 10. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

PART 7. TEXAS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION COMMISSION

CHAPTER 307. INSPECTIONS OF HOMES IN AREAS WITHOUT MUNICIPAL INSPECTIONS

10 TAC §307.7

The Texas Residential Construction Commission adopts amendments to §307.7, relating to failure to comply with inspection requirements. The rule amendments apply to residential construction in areas not subject to municipal inspections. The rule amendments are adopted with changes to the text as proposed and published in the April 10, 2009, issue of the Texas Register (34 TexReg 2348), as discussed herein.

Effective on September 1, 2008, builders and remodelers who undertake certain residential construction projects in areas not subject to municipal inspections are required to have those projects inspected at several stages of construction. The adopted amendments result in homes that are in greater compliance with the accepted residential building standards and with fewer construction defects.

The amendments revise the commission's rule to clarify the consequences that may result when a builder/remodeler fails to conduct the required phase inspections and the penalties associated with that failure. The adopted amendments provide incentives for builders/remodelers to have post-construction forensic evaluations performed when phase inspections have not been timely performed in accordance with the law. The adopted amendments recognize that a builder or remodeler's unintentional failure to have the required inspections performed should not subject the builder to the same penalties that an intentional failure to abide by the law would require.

The commission received only one set of comments regarding the proposed rule amendments. Ned Munoz submitted three comments on behalf of the Texas Association of Builders (TAB). The first of TAB's comments addresses subsections (b)(3), (c)(3), and (e) of §307.7. TAB expresses concern that the rule language directs the commission to take disciplinary action and requires the commission to presume certain intentions. TAB suggests that the term "will" be replaced with the term "may" in order to allow the commission to weigh the severity of a builder's actions and to make case-by-case determinations as to whether a builder acted intentionally.

In response to TAB's comment, the commission declines to modify its rule as requested. The phase inspections required for residential construction in an unincorporated area and in other areas not subject to municipal jurisdiction are mandated by Property Code, Subtitle F. However, the commission's disciplinary powers and authority to assess appropriate administrative penalties promulgated under Property Code Title 16, give the commission discretion to assess a builder's actions and to respond accordingly. The commission has determined that a strong policy of enforcement is necessary to achieve compliance with the new requirements of Subtitle F. Moreover, the commission finds that Subtitle F embodies a policy of the State to provide homebuyers and homeowners with assurances that construction meets applicable building standards. Therefore, the commission believes that its rule must support both deterrence and consumer assurance. Accordingly, if evidence supports a finding that a builder or remodeler's failure to have phase inspections performed was not intentional, the commission has determined that the commission's response must be an action that serves to encourage strict compliance with the requirements of Subtitle F or at least provide consumer assurances of quality construction. So the commission has determined that certain actions will be taken in the event that a builder or remodeler fails to have the legally required phased inspections performed in a timely manner. The commission will notify the homeowner. The commission will provide the builder or remodeler with a copy of the law and regulations requiring phase inspections and the commission will impose a minimum penalty.

As a part of the scheme to enforce Subtitle D, the commission has incorporated varied levels of minimum penalties to reflect the degree to which the evidence supports a finding of intention If evidence demonstrates that a builder or remodeler has failed to comply with Subtitle F intentionally, the minimum penalty increases.

TAB's second comment addresses subsection (g). The commission proposed subsection (g) to provide that "[i]f a builder/remodeler neglects to have a phase inspection performed . . . but has a post-construction forensic evaluation performed and submits the results of the evaluations to the commission and to the homeowner for the subject property before receiving a notice of the failure to comply from the commission, the commission will presume that the failure to comply was not intentional." TAB suggests modifying the text by adding the following language to the end of subsection (g) ", provided that a builder's failure to do so before receiving notice of the failure from the commission will not be deemed as evidence that the failure to comply was intentional." TAB suggests the added language is needed to ensure that a builder who fails to have a post-construction forensic evaluation performed before receiving a notice of failure from the commission will not necessarily be deemed to have done so intentionally.

In response to TAB's comment, the commission notes that the law requires phase inspections of residential construction in areas not subject to municipal inspections. If a builder/remodeler did not have the phase inspection conducted or failed to have completed all of the phase inspections, the builder/remodeler would be out of compliance with the law. The proposed rule reflects the commission's intention, which is to encourage any builder/remodeler that is out of compliance to conduct post-construction forensic tests and to submit those tests to the commission and to the homeowner without prompting by the commission. As proposed, the rule promotes voluntary compliance and self-reporting and encourages the builder/remodeler to resolve the compliance failure as early as possible without need of commission intervention. If a builder/remodeler realizes that it is out of compliance, but voluntarily chooses to have the post-construction forensic testing completed, it is a reasonable assumption that the builder/remodeler was not attempting to circumvent the law. In other words, the builder/remodeler's actions were likely unintentional.

On the other hand, a builder/remodeler's failure to act to resolve the phase inspection omission unless and until the commission issues a notice of that failure would not encourage voluntary compliance or self reporting. The totality of the evidence regarding that builder/remodeler, including the builder/remodeler's practice, allows the commission to make the determination whether the builder/remodeler's failure to comply was intentional. The commission may discern that the builder/remodeler's omission and failure to act is an intentional disregard of the law and rule requirements. For example, if a builder/remodeler were to rely upon post-construction forensic testing more than one time, it is within the commission's discretion to consider such evidence an indication that the builder/remodeler was intentionally failing to conduct the required phase construction inspections. If a builder/remodeler fails to conduct the required phase construction inspections and does not voluntarily conduct post-construction forensic testing, but instead chooses to wait to determine whether the commission or the homeowner discover the omission of one or more of the phase inspections that is required by the law, then the commission might consider such evidence an indication that the builder/remodeler intentionally failed to conduct the required phase construction inspections.

TAB's suggested language modification contradicts the commission's intention and does not comport with the overall action/consequence and action/reward plan created by the commission's rule. The commission finds that TAB's suggested language modification could be limiting to the commission's enforcement actions and might discourage voluntary compliance. Therefore, the commission declines to modify the rule in response to TAB's second comment.

TAB's third comment addresses §307.7(h)(1) and (3). TAB suggests that in two instances where the phrase "the forensic tests" appears, the commission should change the text to "any forensic tests." TAB states its reasons for this suggested modification are threefold: for consistency with the references to measurements that are taken, for consistency with the references in §307.7(h)(2) to forensic tests and measurements, and to take into account that some tests may or may not be performed in accordance with a particular forensic evaluation.

The commission agrees with TAB that the references to the forensic tests should be consistent and the references to the measurements should be consistent. However, the proposed rule amendment requires an opinion letter, accompanied by a report on the inspection, including forensic tests performed and measurements taken. Use of the phrase "any forensic tests" may create ambiguity for some readers who might assume that forensic tests are optional. They are not. The licensed professional engineer or the fee inspector qualified under Chapter 307 is required to conduct forensic testing to support the conclusion of the opinion letter regarding the construction.

For example, a licensed professional engineer must determine that the foundation will serve its intended purpose. The report created by the engineer must describe the forensic tests that were conducted and the measurements taken. Even if the engineer conducts some forensic testing that is inconclusive or upon which the engineer does not base the opinion, the report must describe the forensic testing and report measurements. The report should describe the destructive forensic testing and resulting measurements, core drilling sample locations and resulting measurements, X-rays and resulting measurements, elevation shoot locations and resulting measurements, etc. Knowing which forensic tests were performed and the measurements taken support the engineer's opinion and provides valuable information to the builder and to the homeowner. Should the foundation fail or a problem arise, the description of the forensic tests and the measurement data may be helpful to the builder and homeowner. The phrase "any forensic tests" might suggest that forensic testing is not required; however, there is no option for the engineer to write an opinion letter without having conducted forensic testing.

Similarly, the builder and homeowner should be made aware of which forensic tests a fee inspector performed to demonstrate that the framing and mechanical systems were installed by the builder in compliance with applicable Code. The builder and homeowner should be made aware of which forensic tests a fee inspector performed to demonstrate that installation, operation, and performance of each aspect of the substantially completed project meets all applicable Code. When post-construction forensic testing is conducted in lieu of the required phase inspections, the fee inspector's report should describe the forensic tests performed and the measurements taken which support the fee inspector's opinion letter.

For example, the builder and homeowner should know whether the fee inspector removed the electric plug plates to confirm that the correct size wiring was used; opened the panel box to determine whether the correct size wiring was used; conducted an air or water test on the drain, waste, and ventilation systems; removed the grills of the air conditioner vents to confirm that the correct size duct work was installed; went into the attic to evaluate the condition of the duct work; conducted a dielectric test to determine whether the wire insulation has nicks; sent a camera through the sewer lines to observe bellies or humps; used a peppermint test in the sewer system to check the viability of the system; or performed any destructive testing in various locations throughout the home. This is not an exhaustive list. Rather, these examples demonstrate that there are many forensic tests that may be performed to support the fee inspector's opinion letter. In some instances, more than one test may be used to examine the home for similar potential construction defects.

The phrase "any forensic tests" suggested by TAB to replace the phrase "the forensic test" may create ambiguity for some readers who might assume that the forensic tests are optional or that the fee inspector does not have to check the entire home. However, there is no option for the fee inspector to write an opinion letter without having conducted adequate forensic testing in support of the fee inspector's opinion.

Therefore, in response to TAB's comment and in an effort to reduce or eliminate potential ambiguity regarding the rule requirements, the phrases "the forensic tests" and "any forensic tests" will be replaced by "all forensic tests" and the phrase "any measurements taken" will be replaced by "all measurements taken."

The rule amendments are adopted under Property Code §408.001, which provides general authority for the commission to adopt rules necessary for the implementation of Title 16 of the Property Code. The rule amendments implement Property Code §408.001 and House Bill 1038.

No other statutes, articles, or codes are affected by the rule adoption.

§307.7.Failure to Comply with Inspection Requirements.

(a) A builder or remodeler who fails to comply with the inspection requirements of this chapter will be subject to disciplinary action pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 305 of this title.

(b) The first time that the commission becomes aware that a builder/remodeler has neglected to have a phase inspection performed as required by this chapter, if the builder/remodeler brings the matter to the attention of the commission or is forthcoming with the commission about the oversight in response to a commission inquiry, and the builder/remodeler demonstrates that its failure to have the proper inspections performed was not the result of an intentional disregard for the law requiring inspections of new residential construction in areas in which a municipal inspection is not conducted, the commission will:

(1) notify the homeowner by letter that the builder/remodeler failed to comply with the County Inspection Program and the letter will identify the phases of construction that the new home or construction project should have been inspected;

(2) provide the builder/remodeler with a copy of the law and a link to the commission website for information about the inspection program and requirements; and

(3) undertake disciplinary action pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, in which the commission will offer the builder/remodeler an opportunity to enter an agreed order for disciplinary action including a reprimand and a minimum penalty of $1,500 for each phase of the inspection not timely performed or in lieu of accepting a reprimand and monetary penalty, the builder/remodeler can choose the option to have post-construction forensic evaluations performed for all required phases of construction that were not timely performed, as further described in subsection (h) of this section.

(c) The first time that the commission becomes aware that a builder/remodeler has neglected to have a phase inspection performed as required by this chapter, if the builder/remodeler has not been forthcoming with the commission about the oversight, but demonstrates that its failure to have the proper inspections performed was not the result of an intentional disregard for the law requiring inspections as described in this chapter, the commission will:

(1) notify the homeowner by letter that the builder/remodeler failed to comply with the County Inspection Program and the letter will identify the phases of construction that the new home or construction project should have been inspected;

(2) provide the builder/remodeler with a copy of the law and a link to the commission website for information about the inspection program and requirements; and

(3) undertake disciplinary action pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, in which the commission will offer the builder/remodeler an opportunity to enter an agreed order for disciplinary action including a reprimand and a minimum penalty of $3,000 for each phase inspection not timely performed or in lieu of accepting the monetary penalty, the builder/remodeler can choose the option to have post-construction forensic evaluations performed for all required phases of construction that were not timely performed, as further described in subsection (h) of this section.

(d) The first time that the commission becomes aware that a builder/remodeler has neglected to have a phase inspection performed as required by this chapter, if the builder/remodeler is not forthcoming with the commission about the oversight and cannot demonstrate that its failure to have the proper inspections performed was not the result of an intentional disregard for the law requiring inspections as described in this chapter, the commission will:

(1) notify the homeowner by letter that the builder/remodeler failed to comply with the County Inspection Program and the letter will identify the phases of construction that the new home or construction project should have been inspected;

(2) provide the builder/remodeler with a copy of the law and a link to the commission website for information about the inspection program and requirements; and

(3) undertake disciplinary action pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, in which the commission will offer the builder/remodeler an opportunity:

(A) to enter an agreed order for disciplinary action including a reprimand and a penalty of $5,000 for each phase of inspection not timely performed; or

(B) to accept a reprimand and a total penalty of not greater than $10,000 and have post-construction forensic evaluations performed for all required phases of construction that were not timely performed, as further described in subsection (h) of this section.

(e) For all instances after the first time that the commission becomes aware that a particular builder/remodeler has failed to have a phase inspection performed as required by this chapter, the commission will presume that the failure is the result of an intentional disregard for the law requiring phase inspections and will pursue appropriate disciplinary action for the violation under Chapter 305 of this title.

(f) After notification by the commission that it has become aware that builder or remodeler failed to timely have a phase inspection performed as required by this chapter under subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e) of this section, the builder or remodeler will be provided an opportunity to present information to the commission that the builder/remodeler's failure to have a phase inspection performed as required by this chapter is not the result of an intentional disregard for the law and that information will be considered in determining the appropriate disciplinary action for the violation of this chapter.

(g) If a builder/remodeler neglects to have a phase inspection performed as required by this chapter but has a post-construction forensic evaluation performed and submits the results of the evaluations to the commission and to the homeowner for the subject property before receiving a notice of the failure to comply from the commission, the commission will presume that the failure to comply was not intentional.

(h) A builder/remodeler that has post-construction forensic evaluation performed under subsection (g) of this section or as a part of the penalty for failure to comply with this chapter must submit the following documentation for each applicable phase of construction not timely performed:

(1) For a foundation inspection, the builder/remodeler must submit an opinion letter signed and sealed by a licensed professional engineer that the engineer has performed an inspection of the foundation in accordance with generally accepted standards of engineering practice and has determined that the foundation will serve its intended purpose to the best of the engineer's knowledge. The letter must include a report on the inspection, including all forensic tests performed and all measurements taken, regardless of whether relied upon to make the determination.

(2) For an inspection of the framing and mechanical systems prior to the installation of insulation, wall board, or other wall covering facing the home's interior, the builder/remodeler must submit an opinion letter from a fee inspector qualified under this chapter to perform phase inspections affirming that the fee inspector has determined that the framing and mechanical systems are installed in compliance with the applicable Code. The letter must include a report on the inspection performed including all forensic tests performed and all measurements taken, regardless of whether relied upon to make the determination.

(3) For a final inspection upon substantial completion of the project, the builder/remodeler must submit an opinion letter from a fee inspector qualified under this chapter to perform phase inspections affirming that the fee inspector has determined that installation, operation, and performance of each aspect of the substantially completed project meets all applicable Code. Final inspection upon substantial completion of the project includes but is not limited to plumbing, electric, and mechanical delivery systems; yard grading; attic insulation; ventilation; egress; International Residential Code (IRC); and National Electric Code (NEC) requirements. The letter must include a report of all forensic tests performed and all measurements taken, regardless of whether relied upon to make the determination that all Code requirements are met.

(i) If a builder/remodeler has a post-construction forensic evaluation performed as part of the penalty for failure to comply with this chapter under subsection (h) of this section, the commission will provide that information to the homeowner.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on June 11, 2009.

TRD-200902335

Susan K. Durso

General Counsel

Texas Residential Construction Commission

Effective date: July 1, 2009

Proposal publication date: April 10, 2009

For further information, please call: (512) 463-3926