Is this Legal? Bypass or Future Connection or Both?

JamesTodd5050

This is from an old NYC apartment building. Inspector is saying this is a "gas future"/"future connection", but my understanding(albeit limited) is that this was a common setup decades ago and was in fact specified by the utility (Con Ed) and didn't run afoul of the fuel gas codes at the time. It in essence accomplished the same function as the new bypass meter bars that are currently specified by Con Edison.

Note also that it has been since been locked, presumably by the utility.

Any thoughts on this?

EBEBRATT-Ed

Could have been for a future meter

EdTheHeaterMan

Excellent spot to bypass the meter. You just need to break that lock off the valve.

I hope no one takes this seriously

Intplm.

It is legal. It is a place to run a gas meter spud in the event that the meter needs replacement or other work on the gas line needs to be done without gas service interruption.
There are other ways of doing this in this day in age but this is still a common practice used in many areas.

JamesTodd5050

@Intplm. Thanks for your feedback. Do you operate out of NYC?

Intplm.

JamesTodd5050 said:

@Intplm. Thanks for your feedback. Do you operate out of NYC?

I haven't had the pleasure but I am a study of the east coast of the USA and have read up on and found many similarities in utility methods and code compliances.

JohnNY

Intplm. said:

JamesTodd5050 said:

@Intplm. Thanks for your feedback. Do you operate out of NYC?

I haven't had the pleasure but I am a study of the east coast of the USA and have read up on and found many similarities in utility methods and code compliances.

Don't assume anything about the way Con Ed/NYC DoB operate when it comes to things like this. A Dept of Buildings inspector will fail this for the band iron alone and everything is subject to pass "at the discretion of the Inspector". I see this kind of thing frequently on heads of service and meter banks but if any work is done on that piping, an LAA is required and it will all have to brought up to current codes.

JamesTodd5050

@JohnNY thanks for the response. I get what you're saying. It's basically whatever the inspector says. But whether this is winnable or not, I'm still curious to know the answer. This was a violation given on an existing condition. No work was being done or has been done here. Inspector was in the building already on another matter. Was this legal under the old code? And did Con Edison at one time spec this?

JohnNY

JamesTodd5050 said:

@JohnNY thanks for the response. I get what you're saying. It's basically whatever the inspector says. But whether this is winnable or not, I'm still curious to know the answer. This was a violation given on an existing condition. No work was being done or has been done here. Inspector was in the building already on another matter. Was this legal under the old code? And did Con Edison at one time spec this?

Was this triggered by a Local Law 152 inspection?

JamesTodd5050

JohnNY said:

JamesTodd5050 said:

@JohnNY thanks for the response. I get what you're saying. It's basically whatever the inspector says. But whether this is winnable or not, I'm still curious to know the answer. This was a violation given on an existing condition. No work was being done or has been done here. Inspector was in the building already on another matter. Was this legal under the old code? And did Con Edison at one time spec this?

Was this triggered by a Local Law 152 inspection?

Not that I'm aware.

JohnNY

This "pin" lock in the red rectangle could only have been put there by Con Ed. It was their way of saying "Ok, this can stay but it's got to be locked with our device." It's far from unique and my guess is that it being there was ok under the 1968 code. Again, there is nothing but grey area when dealing with NYC and gas, especially lately.

Intplm.

JohnNY said:

Intplm. said:

JamesTodd5050 said:

@Intplm. Thanks for your feedback. Do you operate out of NYC?

I haven't had the pleasure but I am a study of the east coast of the USA and have read up on and found many similarities in utility methods and code compliances.

Don't assume anything about the way Con Ed/NYC DoB operate when it comes to things like this. A Dept of Buildings inspector will fail this for the band iron alone and everything is subject to pass "at the discretion of the Inspector". I see this kind of thing frequently on heads of service and meter banks but if any work is done on that piping, an LAA is required and it will all have to brought up to current codes.

I'm not making assumptions. I'm speaking directly from (theory) and past experience, and not the whims or opinions/judgments from one inspector to the next.
The question from the original post is, "Is this legal?"
However @JohnNY I would rather defer to you as I know this is your territory. Glad that you wayed in.

mattmia2

It looks to me like that is a valve for operation by the utility only when changing the meter. it is on the supply side and they have it locked so that only the utility can open it.