2024A-03795-CHC-ROC Notice of Hearing & Packet MAILED 2024-03795.pdf

2024A-03795-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-07-30

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Anna Puett , Case No. 2024-03795 COMPLAINANT, Docket No. 2024A-03795-CHC-ROC v. NOTICE OF HEARING ON Awesome Concrete Works Inc. CONTESTED CASE License No. ROC 188368,

RESPONDENT.

This Notice of Hearing is issued under A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(D). HEARING INFORMATION The hearing is set for:

September 5, 2024 9:00 AM Samuel Fox Google Meet. A link will be provided directly from The Office of Administrative Hearings. Go to www.azoah.com to request to appear in-person.

If you have requested to appear in-person at the hearing, the hearing will be held at 1740 W Adams Street, Phoenix, AZ 85007.

You must attend this hearing. This is an adversarial hearing before an administrative

law judge, and is conducted in a similar manner as judicial proceedings. Thus, you must be

prepared to present evidence, including witness testimony and documents, in support of your case.

STATEMENT OF LEGAL AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION

The State of Arizona has determined that the licensing and regulation of construction contractors is a proper state function, and has vested authority in the Registrar of Contractors to administer Title 32, Chapter 10 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. A.R.S. §§ 32-1101 et seq. All hearings for alleged violations of Title 32, Chapter 10 are conducted under Title 41,

Chapter 6, Article 10. A.R.S. § 32-1156.

The statutes and rules governing the hearing can be found at: Arizona Revised

Statutes §§ 41-1092 to -1092.12, and Arizona Administrative Code R2-19-101 to -122.

PARTICULAR ARIZONA STATUTES AND RULES INVOLVED

The statutes and rules the Respondent is alleged to have violated are cited in the

complaint and citation, which were served on the Respondent on June 25, 2024. SHORT AND PLAIN STATEMENT OF THE MATTERS ASSERTED

The complaint and citation allege that the Respondent committed the following act(s): Charge: 1 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(b) Charge: 2 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(a)

Charge: 3 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(b)

Charge: 4 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12) - A.R.S. § 32-1158 Charge: 5 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22)

THE PARTIES TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING

Because Respondent is a licensee and is charged with an act(s) or omission(s) that is cause for the suspension or revocation of a license, Respondent is a party to this case and will be a party to the hearing. Because Complainant alleged Respondent committed an act(s) or omission(s) that is cause for the suspension or revocation of a license, Complainant is a party to this case and will be a party to the hearing. Respondent and Complainant, as the parties to the hearing, will present evidence and argument to the administrative law judge.

The Registrar’s assigned investigator will appear as a witness at the hearing.

RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED The parties to the administrative hearing may choose to be represented by an attorney. A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(B). If one of the parties is a company, the company may be represented by an officer or employee if that person satisfies the conditions set forth in A.R.S. § 32- 1156(B).

CHANGE OF ADDRESS Each party must inform the Registrar and the Office of Administrative Hearings of any change of address within five (5) days of the change. A.R.S. § 41-1092.04.

HEARING PROCEDURES AND RULES

The administrative hearing will be conducted in accordance with A.R.S. §§ 41-1092 to -1092.12, and A.A.C. R2-19-101 to -122. The parties should review the statutes, rules, and processes governing the administrative hearing. Copies of the statutes, rules, and articles regarding the administrative hearing process can be found at https://www.azoah.com/.

REGISTRAR’S APPEARANCE BY VIDEO CONFERENCE OR TELEPHONE

The Registrar’s investigators, employees, and attorneys will appear at the hearing via

video conference or telephone unless requested by a party to appear in-person. Requests for

the Registrar’s investigators, employees, or attorneys to appear in-person must be filed with the Registrar and the Office of Administrative Hearings no later than seven (7) calendar days prior to the hearing date.

HEARING PACKET

In the interests of administrative efficiency, the Registrar compiles and discloses

certain documents to the parties and the Office of Administrative Hearings. These documents

are attached to this Notice of Hearing as the “Hearing Packet.” If any party wishes to submit

additional evidence, they must do so during the hearing after completing a disclosure statement. See “Disclosure Statement” section below.

SUBPOENAS FOR TESTIMONY FROM A WITNESS OR DOCUMENTS The parties to the hearing must be prepared to present evidence in support of their case. If a party wants to obtain testimony from a witness or documents not in the party’s possession, the party must prepare and file a written subpoena for the Administrative Law Judge to review and sign, if approved. A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(C). Forms for requesting a subpoena can be found on the Office of Administrative Hearings’ website at www.azoah.com.

The party seeking a subpoena must serve notice on all the parties to the hearing, and on the

Registrar. A.R.S. § 41-1092.04.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT At least seven calendar days before the hearing, each party must prepare and serve a disclosure statement on all other parties, and file it with the Office of Administrative Hearings. A.A.C. R4-9-118; A.A.C. R2-19-108. The disclosure statement must include any exhibit the

party will use at the hearing. A party’s failure to timely disclose any witness or exhibit,

without good cause, may result in the administrative law judge excluding those witnesses or

exhibits from being used at the hearing. A.A.C. R4-9-118(C). A sample disclosure form is

available on the Registrar’s website at https://roc.az.gov/forms/RC-L-800A%20-

%20Prehearing%20Disclosure%20Statement%2020191007v4.pdf

CHANGING THE HEARING DATE The date of the hearing may only be advanced or delayed on the agreement of the parties or on a showing of good cause. A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(C). The date of the hearing may

be changed by filing a written agreement of the parties to change the date of the hearing. The written agreement must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, directed to the assigned Administrative Law Judge, and transmitted to the Registrar and all other parties. The assigned Administrative Law Judge may be found on the Office of Administrative Hearings’ web portal at www.azoah.com If a party would like to move the date of the hearing without agreement of all parties,

the party must file a written motion with the Office of Administrative Hearings, directed to the

assigned Administrative Law Judge, and transmit a copy to the Registrar and all other parties.

The motion must state in detail good cause for why the date of the hearing should be advanced

or delayed, and the position of all other parties regarding the advancement or delay. A party may also file a motion asserting a right to an expedited hearing upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances or the possibility of irreparable harm. A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(E).

RESOLUTION SHORT OF ADJUDICATION

In any case which is resolved or settled by the parties, or which is withdrawn by the

Complainant without objection from Respondent after the Notice of Hearing is issued, the

parties must notify the Office of Administrative Hearings of the resolution or settlement. Any

such cases will be listed on the Registrar’s website and its records under the category: “Closed Complaints – Resolved/Settled/Withdrawn.” Dated July 26, 2024. By: /s/ Erika Hoskin Legal Secretary Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors

Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail July 26, 2024 to: Respondent(s) Awesome Concrete Works Inc. PO Box 27881 Prescott Vly, AZ 86312 Respondent's Attorney Joel T. Fornara, Esq. 116 N. Summit Avenue Prescott, AZ 86301

Complainant(s) Anna Puett 11090 E Ironwood Ln Dewey, AZ 86327 Copy sent electronically this same date to: Respondent at email address on record with the Registrar Respondent’s Attorney at email address of record with Registrar Complainant at email address on record with the Registrar

Case No. 2024-03795 /

Douglas A. Ducey, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Hearing Packet FAQ What is the Hearing Packet?

The Hearing Packet is a packet of certain documents collected or issued by the Registrar over the course of its investigation.

Who gets the Hearing Packet?

The Hearing Packet is assembled and distributed to all parties and to the Office of Administrative Hearings (“OAH”) prior to an administrative hearing.

What types of cases does the Registrar prepare a Hearing Packet for?

The Registrar prepares a Hearing Packet for Complainant-Handled Cases and No-Pay Cases. Note: If the Docket Number on the Notice of Hearing contains a “CHC” or “NPC”, your case is a Complainant-Handled Case or a No-Pay Case.

What is in the Hearing Packet?

The Hearing Packet contains essential case-specific documents and at a minimum will include the following documents:

● Original complaint;

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov Hearing Packet FAQ

Douglas A. Ducey, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

● Citation; and ● Answer.

The Hearing Packet will also contain the following documents (if applicable):

● Jobsite inspection notices, notes, and photos; ● Written directives; and ● Compliance inspection notices, notes, and photos.

What if there are documents missing from the Hearing Packet?

If there is any evidence you submitted to the Registrar that are not included in the Hearing Packet it is your responsibility to introduce that evidence at the administrative hearing. Note: The administrative law judge assigned to your case does not have access to the entire Registrar record.

If there is additional evidence you submitted to the Registrar during the investigation that you also want to introduce as evidence during your hearing, it is your responsibility to:

● Properly disclose that evidence to the other party; and ● Introduce the evidence during your hearing.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov Hearing Packet FAQ

Douglas A. Ducey, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

How do I disclose evidence I intend to use at a Hearing?

You must properly disclose any and all documents and witnesses you intend to use at your hearing according to the Registrar’s Prehearing Disclosure Rules. See Arizona Administrative Code Section R4-9-118.

A sample prehearing disclosure form and instructions are provided to the parties by the Registrar.

How do I obtain documents I previously submitted to the Registrar?

If you previously submitted documents to the Registrar and need a copy of these documents, please contact the Registrar’s Legal Department or submit a public records request at https://roc.force.com/AZRoc/s/roc-public-request.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov Hearing Packet FAQ

Complainant: ANNA PUETT 11090 E IRONWOOD LN DEWEY, AZ 86327

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 Respondent: Awesome Concrete Works Inc PO Box 27881 Prescott Vly, AZ 86312

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 April 3, 2024

Re: Complaint No. 2024-03795

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

A formal complaint has been filed with the Arizona Registrar of Contractors.

A jobsite inspection is scheduled for Monday, April 29, 2024 at 12:15 PM. The Complainant is required to be present. The Respondent’s attendance is requested and encouraged. The Registrar encourages both parties to make a good faith effort to resolve this complaint prior to the jobsite inspection.

COMPLAINANT: 1. Under A.R.S. § 32-1155(D)(1), the Respondent must be allowed, upon request, the opportunity to inspect the work complained of within fifteen (15) days of receiving this notice. If Respondent is not provided an opportunity to inspect the work within the fifteen (15) day time period, the Registrar may be prohibited from taking further action on this complaint. 2. The Registrar may also be precluded from taking further action on this complaint, if the work that is the subject of the complaint is subject to neglect, modification, or abnormal use. A.R.S. § 32-1155(D)(2) 3. You must provide safe access to any area to be inspected. If access to a roof or other elevated area is required, you must provide a means to safely access the area (ladder or manlift as appropriate). Additionally, please secure any animals.

RESPONDENT: 1. Enclosed is a copy of the complaint. Under A.R.S. § 32-1155(D) you must be allowed, upon request, the opportunity to inspect the work complained of within fifteen days of the date of receipt of this notice. 2. To assist the assigned investigator in evaluating the merits of the complaint, please submit a response to the enclosed complaint to the assigned investigator prior to the scheduled inspection. 3. If you do not attend the jobsite inspection, your absence may negatively impact the investigation, and your interests. 4. If a building permit(s) was required for this project, please have the building permit information available at the jobsite inspection. If either party needs to reschedule the jobsite inspection, please notify the assigned investigator at least three business days prior to the inspection date to schedule a new date and time.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 If the parties resolve the complaint prior to the inspection, please notify the assigned investigator in writing and by phone as soon as possible.

Sincerely,

/s/ Jim Dimond #170 Jim Dimond #170, Investigator 1700 W. Washington St., Suite 105/Yavapai County Phoenix, Arizona, 85007 Phone: (602)542-1525 Office: (928)637-1463 Cell: (623)680-9585 Email: [email redacted]

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 A Guide to Jobsite Inspections

Purpose of the Jobsite Inspection When the Registrar receives a complaint against a contractor’s license alleging poor workmanship, the Registrar generally schedules a Jobsite Inspection. The Jobsite Inspection serves two purposes: 1. To give the contractor an opportunity to inspect the complaint items; and 2. To give the Registrar an opportunity to determine if the contractor’s work violates Arizona law.

Jobsite Inspection Rights and Responsibilities Access to inspect: The property owner has complete control over who they allow on the property. However, if the Registrar’s investigator or the contractor cannot inspect the work, the Registrar will not move forward with a citation.

Cooperation: Arizona law enables injured parties to seek relief for damages through several paths. When dealing with a licensed contractor, the Registrar of Contractors’ administrative complaint process may serve as one of those possible paths. However, in order to use that path, the Registrar relies on the cooperation of all parties to a complaint.

Minimum workmanship: The Registrar investigates workmanship complaints for compliance with minimum workmanship and professional industry standards. The Registrar does not issue citations for work that meets these standards.

Scope: The scope of the Jobsite Inspection is limited to items listed in the complaint filed with the Registrar’s office. It is the complainant’s responsibility to point out the complaint item(s) and the Investigators role to review the item(s). If the complainant identifies additional workmanship items not listed in the original complaint, they must file an addendum to the complaint. The Registrar’s Investigator may identify additional administrative violations by the contractor (e.g. work performed out of scope of the license and failure to provide a contract that meets requirements set by Arizona law) at the time of the inspection.

The Role of the Investigator At the Jobsite Inspection, the Registrar’s investigator will: Only investigate the items listed on the complaint form filed with the Registrar. Will gather evidence to make an informed decision about the complaint items.

What to expect after a Jobsite Inspection 1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 After doing a Jobsite Inspection, the Registrar’s Investigator will leave the jobsite and review the evidence provided during the inspection. Generally, the investigator does not make any determination at the time of the jobsite inspection regarding whether the allegations listed in the complaint are supported. If the allegations are confirmed, the Registrar’s Investigator may issue a Written Directive telling the contractor to correct the poor or incomplete work. If the allegations are not confirmed, the Registrar’s Investigator will close the complaint.

Questions? If you have already filed a complaint and it was assigned to an investigator, you are encouraged to contact that investigator directly with the information listed in your jobsite inspection letter. If you have not filed a complaint yet or have not been assigned an investigator, you can reach the Registrar’s compliance department at (877) 692-9762.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 A Guide to Written Directives Purpose of the Jobsite Inspection When the Registrar receives a complaint against a contractor’s license, the Registrar generally schedules a Jobsite Inspection. The Jobsite Inspection serves two purposes: 1. To give the contractor an opportunity to inspect the complaint items; and 2. To give the Registrar an opportunity to determine if the contractor’s work violates Arizona law.

What to expect after a Jobsite Inspection After doing a Jobsite Inspection, the Registrar’s Investigator will determine whether the allegations listed in the complaint are supported. If the allegations are confirmed, the Registrar’s Investigator may issue a Written Directive telling the contractor to correct the poor or incomplete work. If the allegations are not confirmed, the Registrar’s Investigator will close the complaint.

Written Directives Access: In order to use the administrative process offered by the Registrar, a property owner must provide reasonable access to allow the contractor to fix their work as directed by the Registrar in a Written Directive. Complainants may not put any additional, unnecessary restrictions on the Respondent above and beyond the initial contract requirements agreed upon at the beginning of the project. Respondents are required to make repairs on items identified on any Written Directive, not otherwise restricted by local code or HOA limitations. Complainants must make access available to the Respondent to make the required repairs and failure to provide reasonable access may result in the Registrar dismissing the complaint.

Contractor obligations: The Written Directive will set a deadline for compliance. This is the period of time determined by the Investigator as necessary to complete the items listed in the Directive. The deadline for compliance assumes the contractor will promptly begin working on the items listed in the Directive. Do not wait. Both parties should communicate quickly to schedule the work.

Extensions: If good cause exists to extend this deadline, either party may submit a written request to the Investigator. The Registrar will review requests for extension and determine if the Directive should be extended.

Manner and method of performance: The Registrar does not provide specific instructions for how to correct poor work. A licensed contractor is expected to have the skill and 1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 professionalism to complete the work. Moreover, the complainant may not dictate the manner of repair. If the contractor fails to appropriately correct the work according to the contract, the Registrar will issue a citation.

Compliance Inspection: After the Written Directive expires, the Registrar’s Investigator will contact the complainant to determine if the contractor performed any corrective work. If the contractor did corrective work, the Investigator may schedule a Compliance Inspection to determine if the poor work is corrected. If the contractor did not perform any corrective work, the Registrar’s Investigator will not do a Compliance Inspection and will determine whether to issue a citation based on the administrative record.

Work performed after the directive ends: After the Directive period ends, a property owner may choose to allow the contractor to continue its work. The Registrar encourages parties to work cooperatively, but cannot require a homeowner to continue to allow a contractor access to the property after the Directive period ends in order for the administrative process to continue. Denying access after the Directive ends is not grounds to close or dismiss a complaint.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 Jobsite Inspection Notes

Case No.: 2024-03795 Investigator: Jim Dimond Inspection Date: Monday, April 29, 2024 Inspection Time: 12:15 PM

Jobsite Address: 11090 E IRONWOOD LN DEWEY, AZ 86327

Complainant: ANNA PUETT Respondent: Awesome Concrete Works Inc Matt Puett Paul Wasim, Owner Lyle Montoya, Foreman

Not Present: Not Present:

Jobsite General Notes:

At the inspection I took pictures with my state issued Google Pixel 6pro cellphone camera and I have uploaded the pictures to the complaint document file.

I also digitally recorded the inspection on my state issued Olympus DS-30 digital audio recorder and I have uploaded the audio recording to the complaint document file.

Complaint Item: 1 - CONCRETE DETORAINTING, CONRETE CRACKS, HOLES IN CONCRETE , INADEQUATE DRAINAGE WATER COLLECTING HONYCOMBING

Investigator’s Observation: The concrete installed by this respondent is at the west side of the home and at the top of the slope where a separate contractor stopped his work.

panels of this respondents work have been previously replaced by this respondent and appear to be within standards.

North of the replaced panels however, panels are exhibiting excessive crazing. 1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C011 12/23

The ROC Workmanship Standards booklet under the 'Concrete' section provides:

14. PD Excessive crazing of finished exterior concrete surfaces. AT None. CR Contractor should make necessary repairs.

Additionally, the complainant advised that water enters the garage.

I checked the panels outside of the garage door and they do not flow to the garage, however they are level.

The panels should provide for positive drainage away from the garage door.

The respondent is to correct the conditions in an appropriate manner.

Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(c): All work performed by a contractor in a county, city, or town that has not adopted building codes or where any adopted building codes do not contain specific provisions applicable to that aspect of construction work shall be performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C011 12/23

Complainant: ANNA PUETT 11090 E IRONWOOD LN DEWEY, AZ 86327

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 12/23 Respondent: Awesome Concrete Works Inc PO Box 27881 Prescott Vly, AZ 86312

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 12/23 May 23, 2024

License No. ROC 188368

Re:Complaint No. 2024-03795

WRITTEN DIRECTIVE FROM THE REGISTRAR

Dear Respondent:

After investigation, the Registrar determined that you failed to meet the requirements of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A), and now issues this Directive requiring you to take appropriate corrective action. Failure to comply with this Directive constitutes a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) and may result in the issuance of a citation, discipline of your license, and a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E) of up to $500.00. You must notify the Registrar’s assigned Investigator of your compliance with this Directive prior to 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 12, 2024.

RESTRICTIONS You may not perform or hire other contractors to perform work that is outside the scope of your license. If your license is currently suspended for administrative reasons1, or is inactive, expired, or cancelled, you may not perform any corrective work nor contract in any manner, which includes hiring other contractors to perform work, until the suspension of your license(s) has been lifted or your license(s) has been reactivated.

DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS

You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:

Complaint Item: 1 - CONCRETE DETORAINTING, CONRETE CRACKS, HOLES IN CONCRETE , INADEQUATE DRAINAGE WATER COLLECTING HONYCOMBING

Investigator’s Observation: The concrete installed by this respondent is at the west side of the home and at the top of the slope where a separate contractor stopped his work.

panels of this respondents work have been previously replaced by this respondent and appear to be within standards.

North of the replaced panels however, panels are exhibiting excessive crazing.

This means the license is suspended for lack of qualifying party, lack of bond, nonrenewal, Recovery Fund payout, or for any reason listed in A.R.S. § 32-1124(F).

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 12/23 The ROC Workmanship Standards booklet under the 'Concrete' section provides:

14. PD Excessive crazing of finished exterior concrete surfaces. AT None. CR Contractor should make necessary repairs.

Additionally, the complainant advised that water enters the garage.

I checked the panels outside of the garage door and they do not flow to the garage, however they are level.

The panels should provide for positive drainage away from the garage door.

The respondent is to correct the conditions in an appropriate manner.

Please direct all questions regarding this Directive to the undersigned Investigator.

Sincerely,

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 12/23 Complainant: ANNA PUETT 11090 E IRONWOOD LN DEWEY, AZ 86327

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 June 10, 2024

Re: Complaint No. 2024-03795

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

A formal complaint has been filed with the Arizona Registrar of Contractors.

A jobsite inspection to perform a water test is scheduled for Monday, June 17, 2024 at 09:00 AM. The Complainant is required to be present. The Respondent’s attendance is requested and encouraged. The Registrar encourages both parties to make a good faith effort to resolve this complaint prior to the jobsite inspection.

If either party needs to reschedule the jobsite inspection, please notify the assigned investigator at least three business days prior to the inspection date to schedule a new date and time.

If the parties resolve the complaint prior to the inspection, please notify the assigned investigator in writing and by phone as soon as possible.

Sincerely,

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 6/17/24, 2:55 PM 2015 International Residential Code and Commentary Volume 1 (IRC) - Chapter 4: Foundations - R401.3 Drainage .

menu Menu Sea… 󰍉 󰂜 󰀻 󰘥 Subscribe 󰀄 Sign I

R401.3 Drainage. Surface drainage shall be diverted to a storm sewer conveyance or other approved point of collection that does not create a hazard. Lots shall be graded to drain surface water away from foundation walls. The grade shall fall a minimum of 6 inches (152 mm) within the first 10 feet (3048 mm). Exception: Where lot lines, walls, slopes or other physical barriers prohibit 6 inches (152 mm) of fall within 10 feet (3048 mm), drains or swales shall be constructed to ensure drainage away from the structure. Impervious surfaces within 10 feet (3048 mm) of the building foundation shall be sloped a minimum of 2 percent away from the building. ❖ Along with the proper support for a structure through the foundation system, adequate preparation of the building site is necessary to keep water drainage away from the supporting foundations. Proper site drainage is an important element in preventing wet basements, damp crawl spaces, eroded banks, and possible failure of a foundation system. One of the most important considerations is the arrangement of structures on a building site in a manner that retains natural drainage patterns and minimizes the alteration or disturbance to existing grades. If the designer keeps such factors in mind, the result will be a reduction of ground surface stabilization problems and opportunities for differential settlement through the reduction in the use of fills. A detailed treatment of drainage design is beyond the scope of this document; therefore, only rough guidelines can be provided for areas where a more comprehensive set of grading regulations does not exist. As illustrated in Commentary Figures R401.3(1) and R401.3(2), drainage patterns should result in adequate slopes to approved drainage devices that are capable of carrying concentrated runoff. In some cases, control of concentrated roof runoff by gutters and downspouts may be needed, and if gutters and downspouts are used, provisions should be made to discharge runoff in order to prevent soil erosion. Refer also to Section R801.3. Cross-lot drainage and drainage over graded slopes should generally be avoided. Slopes should be designed with as moderate a grade as possible to minimize instability and erosion. The minimum slope gradients which should be used are a function of the combined ground frost and moisture conditions, soil type, geological features, and geographic conditions. The slope away from the building is required to be 6 inches (152 mm) within the first 10 feet (3048 mm). The exception in this section allows for use of drains and swales if lot lines or physical barriers, such as a steeply sloping lot, do not allow for a 6-inch (152 mm) slope.

https://codes.iccsafe.org/s/IRC2015/chapter-4-foundations/IRC2015-Pt03-Ch04-SecR401.3 1/4 6/17/24, 2:55 PM 2015 International Residential Code and Commentary Volume 1 (IRC) - Chapter 4: Foundations - R401.3 Drainage .

menu Menu Sea… 󰂜 󰀻 󰘥 Subscribe 󰀄 Sign I

Figure R401.3(1) LOT GRADING EXAMPLE

Figure R401.3(2) LOT GRADING EXAMPLE

Jump to Chapter

https://codes.iccsafe.org/s/IRC2015/chapter-4-foundations/IRC2015-Pt03-Ch04-SecR401.3 2/4 6/17/24, 2:55 PM 2015 International Residential Code and Commentary Volume 1 (IRC) - Chapter 4: Foundations - R401.3 Drainage .

menu Menu Sea… 󰂜 󰀻 󰘥 Subscribe Alabama 󰀄 Arizona Sign I

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

District of Columbia

Energy I-Codes

Illinois Iowa

Kansas Kentucky

Louisiana Maine

Massachusetts

2015 International Mississippi Missouri

Residential Code Categories: New Mexico

(IRC) North Dakota

Off-Site Construction

Oklahoma

Pennsylvania PMG

San Antonio, TX

Texas Topics

Utah Washington

West Virginia

Wyoming

2015 I-Codes

South Dakota

About this Title This comprehensive code compiles all building, plumbing, mechanical, fuel gas and electrical requirements for non-commercial one- and two-family dwellings in one convenient code. The regulations cover dwellings and townhouses up to three stories. For the most current adoptions details go to International Code Adoptions

https://codes.iccsafe.org/s/IRC2015/chapter-4-foundations/IRC2015-Pt03-Ch04-SecR401.3 3/4 6/17/24, 2:55 PM 2015 International Residential Code and Commentary Volume 1 (IRC) - Chapter 4: Foundations - R401.3 Drainage .

Spectral Response Accelerations are available from the U.S. Geological Design

menu Menu Sea… Survey from the US Seismic󰂜 󰀻Map󰘥 Design Subscribe tool. Companion 󰀄 Sign I spectral response acceleration maps are also available. The accelerations were developed in conjunction with the U.S. Geological Survey, Building Seismic Safety Council, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and E.V. Leyendecker, A.D. Frankel, and K.S. Rukstales of the U.S. Geological Survey.

About Contact Us

Subscribe Legal

ICC Family of Solutions

Connect With Us

    

https://codes.iccsafe.org/s/IRC2015/chapter-4-foundations/IRC2015-Pt03-Ch04-SecR401.3 4/4 Complainant: ANNA PUETT 11090 E IRONWOOD LN DEWEY, AZ 86327

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 Respondent: Awesome Concrete Works Inc PO Box 27881 Prescott Vly, AZ 86312

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 Case No.: 2024-03795 Investigator: Jim Dimond Inspection Date: Monday, June 17, 2024 Inspection Time: 09:00 AM

Compliance Jobsite General Notes:

Present were Matt and Anna Puett, Respondent Paul Wasim and foreman Lyle Montoya

At the inspection I took pictures with my state issued Google Pixel 6pro cellphone camera and I have uploaded the pictures to the complaint document file.

I also digitally recorded the inspection on my state issued Olympus DS-30 digital audio recorder and I have uploaded the audio recording to the complaint document file.

The inspection was requested by the respondent to render a finding regarding drainage and holding water (ponding). A water test was used to make a determination regarding the ponding.

I had issued a directive requiring correction of crazing and the correction of the slope in the driveway that is in front of the garage.

The International Residential Code R401.3 requires positive drainage away from a structure for 10’.

There are provisions provided in that section for instances when the 10’ is not achievable.

The areas of concern were the panels at the north end of the garage opening. We flooded the area and as per the ROC Workmanship Standards booklet, we needed to wait 30 minutes.

The first panel at the garage is level. The next panel south has some fall toward the southwest and isn’t a concern.

The first and second panels at the garage opening toward the west were included in the flooding

At approximately the 6 minute mark of the inspection, the respondent and complainant engaged in a disagreement that quickly became heated. The respondent charged at the complainant.

The respondent was quickly told to leave and he did.

The Yavapai County Sheriff’s office is involved.

I continued the water test.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 After the 30 minutes expired, I checked the depth of the remaining puddles with a dime on top of a nickel. This is a common method to check for ponding.

Eight puddles remained after the 30 minutes and I eliminated 4 of the puddles as they were obviously within standards.

I did check the deeper ones on the first 2 panels coming off the garage. All 4 of these puddles are within the standards of ponding.

Correction of ponding was not part of the directive as it was and is my belief that the panels were within standards for ponding.

The issue at hand that resulted in the requirement for corrections of the slope is that there is not positive drainage away from the structure. A level has confirmed this and the remaining puddles also support this.

The respondent’s work is appropriately at the same grade as the portion of the garage slab that sits outside.

The garage slab is not part of the complaint or directive.

The respondent did not install the garage floor. Complaints filed against this respondent reference the garage slab would be dismissed.

At the beginning of the inspection, the respondent and Mr. Puett engaged in some discussion regarding the excessively crazed panels however no resolution was reached.

Correction of those panels could potentially be accomplished without removal.

In a previous discussion with the respondent, consideration for extending the due date of the directive due to the water test was likely.

Due to the incident at the inspection, the respondent has been trespassed and extending the due date is moot.

The respondent cannot perform the corrective work at this point and the complaint will be sent to the ROC Legal department.

Compliance Findings: NOT COMPLIANT

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 Compliance Item: 1 - CONCRETE DETORAINTING, CONRETE CRACKS, HOLES IN CONCRETE , INADEQUATE DRAINAGE WATER COLLECTING HONYCOMBING